If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On August 28, 2017, the Defendant driven approximately KRW 7-8m prior to C in Kimpo-si B around 02:50 on August 28, 2017.

A driver who was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling, smelling, red booming, etc., from a slope E belonging to the Kimpo Police Station, who was called up after receiving a report.

Due to reasonable grounds, it was demanded to respond to the measurement of drinking alcohol.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not drive a vehicle and refused to comply with a police officer’s request for measurement of drinking without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. On-site photographs, investigation reports, investigation reports, on-site investigations, and photographs;

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (to examine whether the defendant was driving);

1. Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 148-2 and 44 (2) of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the selection of a fine, and the selection of a fine;

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act recognizes the Defendant’s mistake in sentencing.

I would like to suppress the non-driving of the instant vehicle. However, the Defendant used the instant vehicle at a place no longer than 7-8 meters away from the first parking place and locked in the vehicle. At the time, as police officers, the Defendant was driving the vehicle under influence of alcohol.

There was considerable reason to view that there was considerable reason.

The Defendant asserted that the instant vehicle was sealed in a neutral state, and as a result, the police conducted an investigation into the Defendant’s person and the site at the place where the Defendant first parked, the Defendant could not arrive because the vehicle was pushed down in a neutral state at the place where the Defendant was requested to take measurements.

Nevertheless, the Defendant cannot be deemed to seriously reflect the instant crime while continuing such assertion.

Defendant has been punished once by a fine due to drinking driving.

However, the defendant is diving from the vehicle.