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

On May 27, 2013, at around 01:07, the defendant is driving a Karen vehicle by the defendant's female-friendly job offering D with the defendant's female-friendly job offering D, in front of the 802-dong c apartment in the

The defendant, who received a driver behind the F Carren vehicle, was driving the above E Carren vehicle on the above road and was reported by the defendant while parking it on the above road, and was called to the H District of the Sungdong Police Station at around 02:05 on the same day at the request of the Jindong Police Station on the same day.

On May 27, 2013, the Defendant was required to measure alcohol on three occasions until around 02:15, around 02:25, and around 02:35, on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that he/she driven a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, such as making a breath of a face with red, smelling, smelling, and making a statement with a tag, etc.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not comply with a police officer's request for a drinking test without justifiable grounds, such as standing snow and refusing to take a drinking test.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement I in the suspect examination protocol of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A written statement of I;

1. Investigation report (the telephone conversations, etc. of a shote);

1. Report on actions taken against an employer, and report on the status of the employer-employed driver;

1. Each photograph I states that the defendant's female-friendly job placement D does not comply with the investigation agency on the time when he left the house. However, the accident occurred after D driving the vehicle, and thereafter, the defendant consistently stated that he driven the vehicle in the apartment in order to find another parking space at the seat of the vehicle from the vehicle, and the defendant has consistently stated that he driven the vehicle in the apartment in a different manner from D, it cannot be deemed that the I's statement that the defendant driven the vehicle is credibility.

Application of Statutes

1. The fact that D is driving up to the apartment parking lot under Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act for criminal facts, and the defendant's parking space is found.