The execution of a sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 4, 2019, at around 23:30 on July 4, 2019, the Defendant: (a) while driving a DMW car in front of the city B in front of the city B, the Defendant received a dM robot, and subsequently, received an accident report; and (b) requested the Defendant to take a alcohol test on three occasions on the following grounds: (c) there is a reasonable ground to recognize that the Defendant was drunk and driven under the influence of alcohol, such as a fluorous distance; (d) the Defendant refused to take a alcohol test.

The defendant did not comply with a police officer's request for a drinking test without good cause.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. A written statement;

1. A report on internal investigation (as to the non-compliance with and arrest process);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written circumstantial statements of a host driver;

1. Provisions of the Act on the Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (2) and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act;

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

1. An order to attend a lecture recognizes errors in sentencing punishment under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

There are two fines related to drinking driving.

Serious consideration shall be given to the refusal of measurement even in a situation that seems to be a significant situation.