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

[criminal history] On March 22, 2011, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating road traffic laws at the Seoul Central District Court on March 22, 201, and a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a crime of violating road traffic laws at the Seoul East District Court on October 14, 201.

[Criminal facts]

1. On July 19, 2015, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (e.g., refusal to measure drinking), was faced with the E-driving car f 3 car f., over which the central line was f.m. while driving a C cafeteria located in the Gu-U.S.A., B at the C cafeteria, with D Astrost from July 19, 2015.

The Defendant driven a vehicle under the influence of alcohol by the Defendant from the head of the Gu-U.S. G belt affiliated with the Gu-U.S. police station G belt, which verified the driver through the above K3 vehicle bbox in the Gu-U.S. emergency room located in 10:08 Gu-U.S. Sinsi-ro 04:08.

There is a reasonable reason to determine a person, and it was demanded that the person comply with the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately three times the whole in a drinking measuring instrument from around 04:50 on the same day.

However, the defendant did not comply with a police officer's request for alcohol testing without any justifiable reason by doping a chest pain due to the above traffic accident.

2. Around September 21, 2015, the Defendant driven an I private-bro vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.202% from a sublim building underground parking lot in Jongno-gu Seoul, Jongno-gu, Seoul, to the front road of the building, at approximately 19 meters away from a sublime building underground parking lot in the vicinity of Jongno-gu, Seoul, to a level of about 20 meters.

Accordingly, the defendant was driving a drinking again even though he violated the prohibition of drinking driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police to J;

1. Statement on the circumstances of the driver at each driving school;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on driving alcohol and notification of the results of crackdown on driving alcohol;

1. Photographs refusing to measure drinking;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (verification of the same kind of power, etc.);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act concerning facts constituting an offense;