A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

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 July 27, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2 million for the violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Gwangju District Court's Netcheon Branch.

The Defendant, under the influence of alcohol on July 14, 2019, driven a car of CK9 on the road in front of the warehouse in CK9 at the net city D from F-side to G-side, conflict with the rear part of H Poter Cargo that was parked on the right side of the road in the front part of the said car.

The Defendant, upon receiving the report 112, expressed an explicit intention of refusal of measurement, such as: (a) there exist reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as red, smelling, drinking, and routing and routing, and (b) 22:20 vehicles and 22:30 vehicles on the same day; (c) on the same day, the Defendant was requested to take a alcohol test on three occasions; (d) “I would have been seated on the chief of the police station, but did not drive the motor vehicle, because he did not drive the motor vehicle.”

As a result, the Defendant did not comply with the alcohol alcohol measurement by police officers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Making a report on internal investigation (Refusal to measure the driving of sound);

1. Each photograph;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiry reports and copies of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (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. The sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is based on various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the criminal records (the same type of force, the time interval with the same kind of power before and after the occurrence of the accident), the nature of the crime in this case, the circumstances before and after the occurrence of the crime, the reflectivity of the defendant, the family relationship, and the health conditions of the defendant.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.