도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
1. On November 4, 2018, at around 20:55, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (i.e., refusal to measure the noise level) (i., refusal to measure the noise level), and (ii) while driving a car in the Ccoland under the influence of alcohol on the front side of the car of the Defendant.
The Defendant received a report of the foregoing traffic accident and received a request from the head of the F police box of the Gyeonggi-gu Police Station from the Defendant to respond to the measurement of drinking alcohol by inserting the breath in a breath under the influence of alcohol, on the grounds that there exist reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling, snicking, etc. on the face
Nevertheless, the Defendant refused to put the part of a drinking-free measuring instrument into a drinking-free measuring instrument, and failed to comply with a police officer’s request for a drinking-free measuring instrument without justifiable grounds.
2. On November 4, 2018, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) driving a car at approximately 1k section from the 149 Egye Park to the front road of the same city apartment zone, from the 149 Egye Park at Pyeongtaek-si, without obtaining a driver’s license on November 4, 2018.
3. On November 4, 2018, at around 21:45, the Defendant: (a) arrested a flagrant offender due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence) stipulated in the above paragraph (1) within the office of the F police box located in Pyeongtaek-si Ha; (b) thereby threatening D on the ground that he was arrested as a flagrant offender; (c) “Influence of a fine at the police station, at the police station, she saws the death of a breath; and (d) the breath took the breath of a fine; and (d) assaulted D’s hand to the police box affiliated with the police station.”
Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officers concerning the prevention, suppression and investigation of crimes.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Statement made to D by the police;
1. Exemplary drivers;