2.Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be postponed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On November 15, 2014, at around 02:32, the Defendant driven a ebenz550 vehicle in front of the D week located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-si, while drinking, and subsequently failed to comply with the drinking test by inserting it over about 30 minutes on the face, on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as the F Zone G, and H, who was dispatched to the site after being called up to 112, and called out at the site after being called up for 112, the Defendant was demanded to comply with the drinking test by inserting it into a drinking measuring instrument for about 30 minutes. However, the Defendant did not comply with the drinking test without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

2. Witnesses G and I's respective legal statements;

3. On-site photographs (the defendant refused to take a alcohol test even though he does not have the ability to drink and drive a vehicle, so it is argued that there is a justifiable reason. However, according to the witness G and I's legal statement, it is recognized that there was a considerable reason to suspect that the defendant was a drunk driver. Even if the above witness's statement is partially inconsistent, G's statement that there was a circumstance to suspect a drunk driver's drinking, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant's refusal to take a alcohol test had a justifiable reason).

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

2. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

4. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;