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

On April 6, 2014, at around 02:30, the Defendant was required to respond to the measurement of alcohol by inserting approximately 20 minutes a drinking measuring instrument into the b0 minutes, on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling, smelling, snicking, etc., from an slope D belonging to the Busanananan Police Station C District Unit, while driving a brentool car in the state of drinking at the speech house parking lot located in the Busanandong-dong.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, who was not driving under the influence of alcohol, failed to comply with a police officer’s request for measurement of drinking without any justifiable reason by avoiding a drinking test.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the main driver’s circumstantial statement, investigation report (in the case of crimes in whichCCTV was recorded, with respect to the CD attachment of images);

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor in consideration of the same kind of punishment;

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

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