Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On June 22, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 from the Suwon District Court to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

Around 20:10 on December 29, 2019, the Defendant driven a CM5 vehicle while drinking alcohol on the road near the wife population B, and there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol by the method of inserting alcohol from around 20:30 of the same day to around 20:10 on December 29, 2019, and the Defendant reported 112, and was sent to that effect, from the slope E, etc. affiliated with the police station in the Gangseo-dong Police Station, Chungcheongnam-dong Police Station, etc., the Defendant 112 reported, and did not comply with a police officer’s request for a drinking test without justifiable grounds, even though the Defendant was requested to comply with the drinking alcohol measurement by inserting it into the drinking measuring machine three times from around 20:30 of the same day to around 20:41.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) or (2) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigation reports, reports on detection of drivers, circumstantial statements of drivers, and investigation reports ( circumstantial reports of drivers);

1. Place for measuring alcohol, and photographs of the suspect who refuses to take measurements;

1. Previous convictions: Application of inquiries such as criminal records, etc. and copies of summary orders, one copy of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1), and Article 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the confinement of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant again committed the instant crime, despite the fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order had a record of being punished for drinking driving as stated in its reasoning, and the Defendant’s refusal of drinking alcohol measurement as stated in the instant case is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case, and after being subject to criminal punishment in 2007 as before the judgment, the crime of this case is committed.