If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On January 11, 2012, at around 23:54, the Defendant was required to comply with the alcohol measurement by inserting the whole in a drinking measuring instrument for about 30 minutes through three occasions, on the road in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, 61-11, and on the road in which the Defendant reported that he driven a CPan vehicle under the influence of alcohol, and there are reasonable grounds to recognize that he was driven under the influence of alcohol by the police officer called out.

그럼에도 불구하고 피고인은 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to reports on detection of drivers and circumstantial statements of drivers;

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 53 and 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground of sentencing of the instant crime is that the instant crime was avoided by means of not inserting the properness of the request for measurement of lawful drinking alcohol in a so-called “dacting test”, and that the instant crime was committed by the Defendant, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant had been punished once due to drinking driving, and that the Defendant has a record of punishment once again; that is, the Defendant has a deep depth of his mistake; that is, the favorable circumstances such as the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; that is, the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; the circumstances after the crime; the Defendant’s age, character and conduct