However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Around 21:20 on May 20, 2014, the Defendant driven a Karen car without a driver’s license in the section of approximately two meters front of the Dju shop located in Macheon-si.

2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal to measure a drinking level) was demanded by the Defendant to respond to the measurement of a drinking level by inserting it into a drinking measuring instrument over about 30 minutes, on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as the time and time as specified in paragraph (1) of this Article, and the time and place of the vehicle without a driver’s license, while driving the said vehicle behind and parked on the rear side of the said vehicle, after receiving the report.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not comply with a police officer’s request for measurement of drinking without justifiable grounds, such as avoiding inserting the whole breath of a drinking measuring instrument.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of H;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. On-site and photographs refusing to measure drinking;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Relevant Article 152 subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, Article 148-2 (1) 2 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime (a point of refusal of the measurement of alcoholic beverages);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( considered as favorable circumstances among the grounds for the relevant punishment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( repeatedly considering the same conditions as the above);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had been punished for the same kind of drinking driving on several occasions.