When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is a driver of a wing and cargo vehicle B.

On October 17, 2016, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking, smelling at the entrance of the DKa Center in front of the DKa Center in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon on April 17, 2016, and showing the reaction of drinking alcohol reduction, and driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as driving a motor vehicle at the four-laner in front of the DKa Center in Daejeon-gu, Daejeon.

There is a reasonable reason to determine a person, and it was demanded to respond to the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately 30 minutes in the form of a drinking measuring instrument among approximately 30 minutes from E AssistantF belonging to the Taeduk Police Station E.

그럼에도 불구하고 피고인은 음주 측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 같은 날 20:36 경 1 차 불응, 20:46 경 2 차 불응, 20:56 경 3 차 불응하는 등 정당한 사유 없이 도로 교통법 제 44조 제 2 항에 따른 경찰공무원의 측정 요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Fact-finding survey report, notification of the results of crackdown on driving of one drinking alcohol on the scene of an accident, statement report on the situation of the driver under driving, and inquiry into the results of crackdown on driving of alcohol

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of refusing to measure drinking), and the selection of a fine concerning the crime;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Although the criminal procedure of the provisional payment order had a record of being punished three times due to driving of drinking alcohol for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the nature and circumstances of the crime such as refusing traffic accidents and refusing to measure drinking, etc. are not good, it should be taken into account in particular that the defendant recognized the mistake and reflected against it.