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

[Criminal Power] On April 12, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000,000 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the sex support of the Daegu District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

On June 26, 2020, at around 18:20, the Defendant: (a) driven and parked a DNA car at the entrance of the parking lot for the Danong Building in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu; (b) and (c) was required to comply with the measurement of alcohol by inserting four minutes in total, in consideration of reasonable grounds for the Defendant to be deemed to have driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling and smelling on a drinking-free, red and walking-free distance, from the F of the circumstances belonging to the Daegu-dong Police Station E zone in the Daegu-dong Police Station E zone, which was called upon being suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol.

그럼에도 불구하고 피고인은 음주측정기에 입김을 불어 넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, and investigation report on the results of the crackdown on drinking driving (with respect to the reporter's statement and refusal of suspect measurement)

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (the confirmation of the same type of criminal records);

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of a fine concerning criminal facts, and the choice of a fine;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, even though the defendant had a record of being punished for drunk driving, has again reached the crime of this case.

In particular, the refusal of drinking alcohol measurement is more serious because it interferes with the police officer's official duty that requires the lawful drinking measurement.

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