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

On October 13, 2012, around 22:30 on October 13, 2012, the Defendant was demanded to stop from F as a suspicion of drunk driving, on the street, around 23:35 on the same day while driving a D-packer car after drinking alcohol at the mouth near the in hole located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

There are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as having a person, a person, an inaccurate and inaccurate state of walking, and a large amount of walking, with red shocking, and thus, the Defendant did not respond through three times from October 23, 2012 to 0:17 the following day without justifiable grounds, even though the police officer F requested the Defendant to measure drinking in the above E zone.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Determination as to the assertion of a report on the situation of a drinking driver, a breathe measurement photograph, Defendant, and defense counsel

1. The defendant is found not guilty on the ground that although the defendant's assertion was made at the time and place of the judgment, he did not refuse to take a sobage test.

2. 판단 증거의 요지 기재 각 증거에 의하면, ① 순경 F은 호흡측정기로 피고인의 음주 여부를 측정하려고 한 사실, ② 피고인은 심폐기능에 지장이 있는 상태가 아니었음에도 호흡측정기에 숨을 불어넣는 시늉만 하였을 뿐 제대로 숨을 불어넣지 않아 음주측정수치가 나타나지 않은 사실, ③ 당시 사용된 호흡측정기는 정상적으로 작동하는 장치였던 사실을 각 인정할 수 있고, 피고인의 위와 같은 행위는 정당한 사유 없이 음주측정에 불응한 것에 해당하므로(대법원 2000. 4. 21. 선고 99도5210 판결 등 참조), 피고인 및 변호인의 위 주장은 받아들이지 아니한다.

Application of Statutes

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