Defendant shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On January 21, 2018, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle of E in front of the D gas station located in C at the time of the police station at the time of the border around 05:15, while driving a motor vehicle of E in the influence of alcohol, he/she driven the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling from G to the police box belonging to the police station at the port of the relevant port, setting a redlight on the face, etc.

There was a reasonable reason to determine a person, and it was demanded to respond to the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately four minutes into a drinking measuring instrument four times between 21 minutes.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, who was unable to take a drinking measuring instrument into consideration, failed to comply with a police officer’s request for a drinking test without justifiable grounds, by avoiding it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness G and H;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the reports on detection of suspected victims of violating the Traffic Act (Refusal of measurement of drinking), reports on the situation of the driver in charge, investigation reports (report on the situation of the driver in charge), notification of the results of the crackdown on the driving of drinking, internal investigation reports (related to photographs, such as refusal of measurement of drinking, etc.), records of the use of drinking meters, traffic control guidelines, and investigation reports;

1. Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 148-2 and 44 (2) of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the selection of a fine, and the selection of a fine;

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

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment;

1. The crime of this case on the ground of sentencing under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with the burden of litigation costs is not in compliance with a police officer’s request for alcohol alcohol measurement without any justifiable reason, and the nature of the crime is bad, despite the existence of objective evidence, such as photographs at the time, the defendant does not seem to have any attitude against the purport that he/she did not comply with a police officer’s request for alcohol measurement three times, and he/she did not comply with a police officer’s request for alcohol measurement at the fourth time and did not comply with a police officer’s request four times in the fourth

However, the defendant.