If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On September 19, 2015, the Defendant found the Defendant under the same conditions as the driver of the foregoing vehicle and caused a traffic accident while driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol, upon receiving a report from 112 that the driver of the stop vehicle, who appears to be under the influence of alcohol in front of the D agency located in Ansan-si D Office C, in Ansan-si on September 10, 2015, the Defendant:

Since there is a considerable reason to suspect so, it was demanded to respond to the measurement of drinking by inserting the whole in a drinking measuring instrument.

Nevertheless, the Defendant refused to comply with a police officer’s request for measurement of drinking without justifiable grounds, even though he/she received a demand for measurement of drinking at around 11:01 on the same day, around 11:11 on the same day, and around 11:24 on the same day, such as he/she did not drive a drinking, and did not comply with such demand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of G and F;

1. A survey report on actual conditions and a map at the scene of an accident;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. The ledger using sobling measuring instruments;

1. Determination as to the defendant and defense counsel's assertion of the 112 reported department related to the case

1. The Defendant, at the time of the instant case, was driving under the influence of alcohol with not less than 0.05% alcohol concentration in the blood.

Inasmuch as there was no reasonable ground to determine the person, the Defendant is not guilty of violating the Road Traffic Act, even if he did not respond to a police officer’s request for measurement of drinking, even if he did not respond to the request for measurement of drinking by reason of the crime stated in the judgment of the injury on the part of the Defendant.

2. According to the evidence examined above, the following facts can be acknowledged.

① The Defendant concealed a vehicle parked while driving a stove vehicle at the time and place stated in the facts constituting the offense in the judgment.

② Accordingly, the Defendant had talked with a person who was in the process of stoveing down the stoves on the said stoves vehicle.

(3) G shall be above.