A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 26, 2014, at around 00:55, the Defendant was required to respond to the measurement of alcohol by inserting approximately 30 minutes of alcohol into a drinking measuring instrument, such as smelling the Defendant, while driving a b car in front of the Ansan Home Stack drive on the front side of the Ansan-si in front of the Ansan-si, which is located in Pyeongtaek-si, the Defendant was in compliance with the alcohol test by inserting it into a drinking measuring instrument for about 30 minutes, on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling the alcohol.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not comply with a police officer's request for measurement of alcohol without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial report of an employee;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reporting;

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 chosen;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on probation and order to attend the course of education is that the defendant is strictly punished in light of the police officer's failure to comply with a legitimate demand for alcohol measurement even though he/she had a history of criminal punishment three times or more due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving at drinking).

However, it is so decided as per Disposition by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant appears to have recognized the facts charged in the instant case; (b) there was no record of punishment exceeding the fine; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, etc.