A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On March 19, 2013, the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle in front of the gas charging station located in the Gam-gun of Gyeonggi-do, which was at around 21:00 on March 21, 2013, while driving a motor vehicle, and the police officer called to the site upon receipt of a report that there is a suspicion of drinking driving, discovered the Defendant who stops a motor vehicle on the road above and is traveling a motor vehicle on the road above, found him/her to have been found to have driven a motor vehicle, and measured his/her drinking level, and there is considerable reason to recognize him/her to have driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking, smelling, snicking, snicking, snicking on the face, etc., and making it difficult for him/her to properly hold the body. On the same day, at around 21:15, the Defendant did not comply with a request of a police officer for a alcohol measuring method of putting it into a drinking measuring machine for approximately 20 minutes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Reporting on detection of a suspect in violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving), reports on the status of drivers and reports on investigation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to suspect detection photographs and photographs refusing to measure drinking;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of penalty, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The crime of this case committed by the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter the following sentencing grounds) is committed by the defendant without justifiable reasons. At the time of detection, at the time of detection, the defendant's act of drinking alcohol test is refused without justifiable reasons. The defendant's act of drinking alcohol test has been faced with the front front front front front front of the vehicle of the defendant at the time of detection, the front front and rear bracs, etc. are broken, and the front rear blac has been severely impered, and the risk of drinking alcohol driving is obvious due to the operation in the complete condition, and the defendant has already been subject to criminal punishment several times from around 203 to around 2010.