도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.
If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.
Punishment of the crime
On January 26, 2013, at around 01:57, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the front of the “E” road located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, and the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol by a slope I belonging to the H District Department of the Seoul Geumcheon Police Station, which caused a traffic accident involving GNE-A6 automobiles while driving Fudi A6 automobiles while drinking.
At around 02:45 on the same day, the defendant was required from the slopeJ belonging to the above police station to respond to a drinking test for about 20 minutes, but did not comply with it without justifiable grounds, on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the defendant was driven while under the influence of alcohol, such as heavy snow, smelling, drinking, walking, walking, etc. at the Seoul Geumcheon Police Station's Office for Guard and Traffic Accident Investigation Office in Gwanak-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.
Summary of Evidence
1. Protocol of the examination of witness to the witness K;
1. Results of each reproduction and viewing of taxi images, hyd images, and h building images;
1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;
1. A certificate of measurement of drinking alcohol, a report on detection of drinking drivers, and a report on the status of drinking drivers;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;
1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, which choose the penalty for the crime;
1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that there was no reason to believe that the defendant was driving on his own, and that he was driving on under the influence of alcohol. However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, i.e., from the investigative agency to the investigation agency, K was consistently seated in the driver's seat of a friendly car, and there was no other person than the defendant in the said car, and i.e., a car and a taxi.