However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On February 20, 2017, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (refluence of alcohol measurement) on the road: (a) around 01:30 on February 20, 2017, the Defendant operated a motor vehicle from the bus stops in the vicinity of 514, 514, 'An apartment complex of the Han River Village 1', "a apartment complex of the Yellow River" in the front bus stops, and operated approximately 80 meters from the bus stops to the entrance of the above apartment site, she misleads the Defendant as being shocking of people and directly driven a motor vehicle at the 112 reported center.

A report was made to the effect that “the person is friendly.”

The defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling, snifting, and rheating, f, a slope F belonging to the Suwon Police Station E District, which was called upon the above 112 report.

Since there are reasonable grounds to determine the person, the defendant was required to respond to the drinking measurement.

However, the defendant's " why the defendant has reported is why he should measure."

“Admonishing” and refusing to take a drinking test, and continue to comply with a police officer’s request for a drinking test without a justifiable reason for about 20 minutes after they were connected to the E zone.

2. On February 20, 2017, the Defendant: (a) 01:35 on May 20, 2017, the Defendant: (b) 52 of Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, 514, Dang-gu, Young-gu, 514, Dang-gu, 112 on the front side of the road; and (c) Doll F, a slope F, belonging to the Suwon Police Station Ear-gu, the Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, the Defendant: (a) dump F, “The Dok F, the Dok-gu, the Dok-gu, the Dok-gu, the Dok-gu, the Dok-gu, the Dok-gu, the head of which,

As a result, the Defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties of police officials concerning the handling of reports and the crackdown on drinking.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defense counsel’s written opinion on June 1, 2017, when the Defendant submitted the Defendant’s legal statement to the defense counsel, indicated that the Defendant was physically and mentally weak at the time of committing the instant crime, but considering all the circumstances, such as the Defendant’s status at the time of committing the instant crime and the circumstances after committing the instant crime.