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

[criminal record] On May 11, 2009, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seo-gu District Court Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court, and on February 8, 2011, the above court issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

【Criminal Facts】

On November 22, 2019, the Defendant was demanded to comply with the alcohol testing method by inserting the breath of a drinking measuring instrument, on the front of the C pharmacy located in Seo-gu, Daegu, Daegu, at around 23:09, on the ground that there exist reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant’s walk was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as making a breath from the slope F belonging to the Daegu Seo-gu Police Station E-gu, Daegu, which called the scene after receiving a 112 report, and making it difficult for the Defendant’s walk to be seen as driving under the influence of alcohol.

Nevertheless, the Defendant refused to put the breathm in the drinking measuring machine into the drinking measuring machine without justifiable grounds while stating, “I would like to be why he would have been unable to drive the vehicle in the country, or because he would not drive the vehicle,” and did not comply with the police officer’s request for a breath test without justifiable grounds.

As a result, the defendant violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol and refused to take a drinking test.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Soverbling field photographs, 112 report processing table, report on the situation statement of the driver himself/herself, CCTV photographs for crime prevention, the register of driver's licenses, and the register of the driver's licenses;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports (verification of sound driving records);

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 (see, e.g., Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence (see, e., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da14488, Apr. 2, 2009).