If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

피고인은 2012. 1. 10. 23:30경 술을 마신 상태로 C 소나타 승용차를 창원시 마산회원구 양덕동에 있는 짱호프 앞 보도에서 같은 장소 봉암동 돌탑 쪽으로 약 15미터 상당의 거리를 전진 및 후진으로 2회 운전하여 약 60미터 상당의 거리를 음주운전을 하였다고 인정할 만한 상당한 이유가 있어 D파출소 소속 경위 E로부터 음주측정에 응할 것을 요구받고도 2012. 1. 11. 00:14경 최초 측정거부, 같은 날 00:26경 2차 측정거부, 같은 날 00:39경 3차 측정거부 하는 등 최초 측정요구로부터 10분 간격으로 3회에 걸쳐 음주측정을 거부하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs, non-compliances with the request for measurement of drinking, reports on the status of a drinking driver, and reports;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, which choose the penalty for the crime;

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Although the Defendant has refused a police officer’s request for a measurement of alcohol consumption, the Defendant does not have to drive a vehicle while drinking alcohol on the same day, and there is justifiable reason to refuse a measurement of alcohol consumption.

2. The crime of refusing to measure the alcohol under Article 148-2 (1) 2 of the Road Traffic Act is established when a person who has reasonable grounds to be recognized as being under the influence of alcohol fails to comply with the measurement by a police officer under Article 44 (2) of the same Act. In light of the provisions of Article 44 (2) of the same Act, in full view of the objective circumstances at the time of the request for a measurement of alcohol, there are reasonable grounds to recognize that a driver has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, and in order to confirm