Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On January 12, 2013, at around 07:33, the Defendant was demanded to comply with a drinking test by inserting it into a drinking measuring instrument over about 30 minutes, in a manner that, while driving a 38 national highway in the vicinity of the Gongsung-si Gongsung-si at the port of the Gongsung-si, a traffic accident that conflicts with the left-hand side of the D Freight Vehicles parked on the road while driving the Kapet Kapet Kapet Kapet Kapet Kapon, and receiving a traffic accident report, and driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling from the sloping F of the Masung Police Station called on the road, making a smelling, gabing red on the face, and making it possible to recognize that the Defendant driven the vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not comply with a police officer's demand for alcohol testing without a justifiable reason by avoiding the method of breathing the breath in a short period of breath and in a weak manner.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F and G;

1. Report on actions taken against an employer, and report on the status of the employer-employed driver;

1. Results of verification of drinking meters;

1. Suspect, musical playing, refusal to measure, photograph and photograph;

1. Copies of the register of drinkbling measuring instruments, and details of the use thereof;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Application of the video CD-related statutes;

1. Relevant laws concerning criminal facts, and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, and selection of fines;

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

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant responded to the measurement of alcohol at the time of measuring the third alcohol level, and that the police officer has not refused the measurement of alcohol level because the result of the measurement of alcohol level was measured as "0.00%", and that the police officer has not refused the measurement of alcohol level.

2. The following circumstances found by each evidence of the ruling, i.e., ①.