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

1. Around 05:40 on March 22, 2016, the Defendant: (a) performed drinking, such as scam, at a scam-type restaurant where the trade name in the Nam-gu, Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu is unknown; (b) operated a dhum-p motor vehicle at approximately 6km section from the place to the Ulsan-gu C apartment parking lot.

On the other hand, upon receiving a report that a motor vehicle driven by the defendant is suspected of drunk driving, such as a motor vehicle driving distance, around 06:00 on the same day, the police officer F, and F, and F, and F, and G, who called the above C Apartment 502, the defendant's dwelling place, demanded the defendant to take a drinking-free test. When a drinking-free test was conducted, the above police officer requested the defendant to take a drinking-free test, but the defendant failed to comply with the police officer's drinking test four minutes over 40 minutes without justifiable grounds.

2. On March 22, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 06:40 on March 22, 2016, at the above C Apartment 502, the Defendant: (b) reported and sent to the site the Defendant for a drinking test; (c) when the Defendant demanded the Defendant to take a drinking test, the Defendant expressed that the Defendant “schep and Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat” was pushed down with the Defendant’s hand; and (d) the Defendant tolded G with her hand, stating that the Defendant “nat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Haat Ha?

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with police officers' performance of their duties on the measurement of legitimate drinking.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The statement of each police officer made to F and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to notify the results of drinking driving control;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor ( Taking into account the fact that the person has a previous criminal record of the same kind);

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code and Article 38 of the Criminal Code among concurrent crimes.