The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for not less than 1 year, 3 years of suspended sentence, 160 hours of community service, 40 hours of compliance driving) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the arguments of this case and the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records, such as the Defendant’s age, character, environment, and social ties, the lower court’s punishment seems to be unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing is reasonable, on the ground that the Defendant’s punishment seems to be unreasonable, on the following grounds: (a) the two times of punishment was 10 years ago; (b) the Defendant did not lead to the instant crime; and (c) the Defendant’s distance prior to refusing to take a alcohol test was about 2 meters; and (b) the Defendant’s vehicle driving ahead of refusing to do so.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is rendered after pleading

【Reasons for the Judgment of the Court which has been written] The summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Application of Statutes

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;

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for community service and lecture attendance order;