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 July 6, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Jung-gu District Court on July 6, 2007, and on May 22, 2009, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime, etc., and on June 16, 2014, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 7 million for the same crime.

On December 13, 2019, at around 21:09, the Defendant, while drinking alcohol on the front side of Dpoter B located in Dpoter 2, brought about inconvenience to traffic by drinking alcohol on the front side of Dpoter 2.

At this time, it was required to respond to the measurement of alcohol by inserting the breath in a breath of the steel police station, on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the breath was driven while under the influence of alcohol, such as the breath of drinking in the Defendant’s entrance from F, the breath of a horse, the breath of a horse, the breath of a breath of a brea police station, the breath of a horse

Nevertheless, the police officer did not comply with the request for a so-called alcohol test without any justifiable reason because he did not drive under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. A report on internal investigation and report on internal investigation (on-site and on-site and on-site and on-site images of refusing to measure alcohol);

1. On-site photographs and CCTV images to captures;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, etc. inquiry reports (A);

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) and (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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the crime of this case is not good, the defendant again commits the crime of this case even though he had a previous record of drinking alcohol driving, and the age, character, conduct and environment of the defendant, motive, means and consequence of the crime.