However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On May 21, 2019, at around 01:15, the Defendant: (a) was parked in the section of approximately 13 km of blood alcohol concentration from the front of the Defendant’s house located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si; (b) from around 01:15 to the front of the same city, the Defendant caused a traffic accident leading to the shock of the Echier XG car that was parked while driving the D car while under the influence of alcohol concentration in the same city.

Accordingly, it was demanded to respond to a drinking test on the ground that there is a reasonable ground to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as the Defendant’s walking is a blind-distance and a red red light, in the situation where the Defendant was a police official belonging to the F District District of the Chungcheongnam-gu Police Station, in receipt of 112, a vehicle driven by the Defendant from G, who is a police official belonging to the F District of the Chungcheongnam-gu Police Station, caused a traffic accident.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at around 01:15, around 01:20, around 01:25, around 01:25, and around 01:30 on the same day, made a false statement to the effect that, even though the Defendant was demanded to take a drinking-free measuring instrument at a total of four times, the Defendant refused a drinking-free measuring instrument in a manner that would not comply with a drinking-free measurement.

Accordingly, the defendant did not comply with the drinking test of a police officer as a person who has a considerable reason to recognize that he was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inspection of the results of the drinking driving control;

1. Statement on the circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (victim H telephone communications);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, such as probation, community service order, and order to attend lectures: The fact that there exists the same previous penalty of a fine, and the circumstances and details of the instant crime.