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 October 5, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million by the Seoul Southern District Court as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

On December 23, 2019, at around 01:36, the Defendant was required to comply with the drinking test by inserting the drinking measuring instrument three minutes between about 15 minutes, in a manner that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, such as the Defendant’s walking condition, in an inaccurate and inaccurate manner, while driving a B QM3 vehicle on the road near the 12-lane of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and having received a report from the circumstances D belonging to the Seoul Coast Guard C, which called the Defendant, while driving the B QM3 vehicle on the road near the 12-lane of the entrance.

그럼에도 피고인은 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유없이 경찰공무원의 음주측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigation reports and notification of the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries into criminal records and investigation reports (Attachment of judgment);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1), 44 (2) and (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty;

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

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

1. The fact that it is highly necessary to eradicate the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act; the Defendant again commits the instant crime despite the history of punishment for drunk driving; the Defendant’s refusal to take a drinking test by the traffic control police officer despite a request for a drinking test; there is a lot of history of criminal punishment; the Defendant recognized the facts charged; the Defendant’s age, character and behavior and environment; the motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the latter.