When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

[Criminal Power] On June 21, 2012, the Defendant received a fine of two million won as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Daegu District Court’s Ansan Branch on June 21, 2012.

【Criminal Facts】

On June 16, 2020, the Defendant: (a) received a report from the head of the Dong-dong Police Station D Zone D, which was parked in the direction of the road in the direction of the road in order to recognize that a driver was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking, drinking, snowing, and failing to walk properly, the Defendant was requested to comply with a drinking test on a total of three occasions from 03:56 to 04:38, but refused it without justifiable grounds.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) or (2) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. The criminal defendant's statutory statement, the arrest report on the offender in violation of the Road Traffic Act, the report on internal investigation (preparation of the report on the circumstantial statement of an immigration driver), the investigation report, the report on internal investigation (including the circumstance of an immigration driver), the report on internal investigation (on-site photograph), the report on internal investigation (on-site photograph), and the report on detection of a immigration driver;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Fines of 10 million won to 20 million won;

2. Non-application of the sentencing criteria: Offenses not set; and

3. The defendant who has been sentenced to a sentence is driving under the influence of alcohol again, even though he had a history of punishment once due to drinking.

The police officer's demand for a drinking test was rejected.

However, it is against the defendant's recognition of the crime of this case.