On June 10, 2017, at around 13:45, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle while drunkly under the influence of alcohol, such as her face from the slope F of the Happ Police Station E box belonging to the Happon Police Station, while driving the Dcoon in front of the C commercial building of Sejong Special Self-Governing City, the Defendant driven the motor vehicle in front of the Dcoon.

There is a reasonable reason to determine a person, and it was demanded to respond to the measurement of drinking by inserting the whole in a drinking measuring instrument for about five minutes.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not comply with the above request by stating that "the walp in the walp walk walk walk" to the above F.

At around 13:50 on the same day, the Defendant was arrested as an offender in the act of committing a violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of drinking), and was brought into custody in the case of a strike in Sejong Special Self-Governing City G on the same day, and thereafter, at around 14:00 on the same day, received the same demand from the above F for about 10 minutes.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not comply with the above request by implied reply, etc.

As a result, the defendant did not comply with a police officer's request for alcohol testing without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking alcohol and a statement in the circumstances of the driver of drinking alcohol;

1. A report on investigation;

1. Control photographs on the traffic accident scene;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the ledger on use of drinking meters;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter the following sentencing grounds) include driving of alcohol, refusing to measure drinking, etc., the Defendant committed an offense against the same kind of crime (gold, suspension of execution), even though this four times or more, and the risk and extension of the crime caused by drinking driving is significant, although the Defendant was able not to repeat the crime, such as selling a vehicle, etc. with the depth of the crime.