A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 25, 2015, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol by drinking alcohol, such as drinking alcohol, smoking on the face, etc., from E at the border of the traffic safety department belonging to the Suwon Police Station, among the water sources, while driving the motor vehicle by drinking alcohol on the front of the Suwon-gu Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si.

Due to reasonable grounds, there was a demand for responding to the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately 30 minutes into a drinking measuring instrument.

그럼에도 피고인은 음주 측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

2. A criminal suspect who violated the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act did not purchase mandatory insurance, but operated a car by obtaining D's franchise owned by the criminal defendant at the time and place stated in the above paragraph 1.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused to the prosecution;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes regarding mandatory insurance;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44-2 (2) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 46 (2) 2 and 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act, Articles 46 (2) 2 and 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act, and selection of imprisonment with labor;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act regarding the order to provide community service and attend lectures had responded to a request for drinking alcohol measurement twice, and the police officer’s assertion that the police officer did not accept the request even though the police officer demanded a measurement based on the collection of blood, and thus, the Defendant and the defense counsel was not acquitted. Thus, the following circumstances are acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, the police officer E, based on the evidence duly adopted