A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 March 6, 2017, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million by the Jeju District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

피고인은 2019. 12. 20. 23:40경 술에 취한 상태로 B 모닝 승용차를 운전해 서귀포시 C 앞 도로에서부터 같은 시 D에 있는 E편의점 앞에 도착해 위 편의점에 들어가 그곳에서 근무 중이던 직원과 시비가 되어 112 신고를 받고 출동한 서귀포경찰서 F파출소 소속 경위 G 등으로부터 피고인에게서 술냄새가 나고 혈색이 붉으며 위 승용차를 운전해 편의점에 도착하는 모습이 촬영된 CCTV 영상 등 피고인이 술에 취한 상태에서 운전하였다고 인정할 만한 상당한 이유가 있어 2019. 12. 21. 00:00경부터 00:15경까지 3회 이상 호흡측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 방법으로 음주측정에 응할 것을 요구받았음에도 입김을 불어 넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 이유 없이 경찰관의 음주측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of the drinking-driving control, the report on the state of a drinking driver's state, investigation report (report on the state of a drinking driver), photographs (influence of measurement), 112 case records, CCTV image CD, investigation report (influence of measurement refusal);

1. Previous records: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following circumstances shall be considered in light of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The crime of this case with the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is refused by a police officer even after the police officer's request for the measurement of drinking, and is punished as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.