However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On December 30, 2017, the Defendant: (a) was parked on the side of the road while driving a cpoter 2 chemical vehicle in front of the post office, with the Defendant, at the second degree of Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Seoul, 201.

D. The Defendant was injured by shocking the vehicles, telegraph poles, etc., and the Defendant was transferred to Red Asan Hospital.

On December 30, 2017, the Defendant driven the said vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking and smelling the suspect at an emergency hospital in Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gu, Hongcheon-gu, Hongcheon-gu, Hongcheon-do, Hongcheon-do, Hongcheon-gu, Hongcheon-do, and Hongcheon-do, at the time of drinking.

If there are reasonable grounds to recognize it, it was demanded to respond to the measurement of drinking by inserting four times from F of the Hongcheon Police Station E District Guard of the Hongcheon Police Station, which was dispatched after being reported 112.

Nevertheless, the defendant avoided this and did not comply with the police officer's request for a drinking test without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to make a survey report on actual condition, the notification of the results of regulating drinking driving, the circumstantial statement report on the driver of drinking, and the situation report on drinking driving;

1. The provision of Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime under the relevant provision of the Act, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act was that the Defendant was punished for drinking in 2001 and 2015, and the Defendant caused a traffic accident by driving under the influence of alcohol in this case, and accordingly, rejected the measurement of drinking, as stated in its reasoning, due to the occurrence of punishment.

However, the defendant makes a confession and reflects in depth the wrongness.

The defendant scraps a motor vehicle which is currently driven and does not drive a motor vehicle under drinking.

In these circumstances, the circumstances where the defendant supports the family, the age, sex, environment, family relationship, and after the crime.