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

On November 18, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 21:3, 2014, at the 103 parking lots of Young-gun, Young-gun, Youngnam, the Defendant was required to comply with the measurement of alcohol by inserting approximately 30 minutes of alcohol in a manner of inserting the breath of alcohol measuring instruments, on the ground that there was a statement by the reporter that he had observed the breath of alcohol driving; (b) from the slope E belonging to the D District of the Mine Police Station D District called out after receiving a report on the 112 witnessing the breath of alcohol driving; and (c) the Defendant made a statement by the reporter that he had observed the breath of alcohol driving.

Nevertheless, the defendant asserts that he has been driving repeatedly, and that he is not aware of his memory, but did not comply with a police officer's request for alcohol measurement without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs which refuse to measure alcohol;

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

1. Imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act - Unfavorable circumstances: The defendant has been sentenced to a fine on two occasions in 2005 and 2006 for drinking driving in 2006. The circumstances of interest: the defendant reflects the crime of this case, the defendant is treated due to depression, etc., the family of the defendant is the preference of the defendant, and the defendant must support two children.