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

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, around 05:07 on December 19, 2014, is waiting at three-lanes of the Seoul Metropolitan Area for the purpose of operating C benz cars at the time of the operation of the city in the direction of the city in Ansan-si.

Bail had been divingd.

The defendant, after receiving a report from 112 that the driver of a vehicle waiting for the signal is diving in the vehicle, confirmed the status of the defendant, and there is a reason to suspect that the driver of a vehicle waiting for the signal was driving a vehicle in the state of drinking in the state of drinking, such as drinking and smelling in the entrance, and the face is shocked, etc., and accordingly, requested the defendant to take a drinking test at around 05:25 on the site, but refused the measurement without justifiable grounds. At around 05:35 on the same day, the second measurement demand at around 05:45 on the same day, and the third measurement demand at intervals of 10 minutes on the same day, but refused it without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The circumstantial report on the driver, and the report on the status of the driver's license;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. On-site photographer Defendant and defense counsel asserted that the initial drinking test result was not taken as a result of drinking, and there is no reason to suspect it as drinking. However, according to the evidence mentioned above, it is acknowledged that the initial drinking test result was not taken as a result of drinking, but the initial drinking test result was not taken as a result of drinking again. On the other hand, the Defendant was making a stop on the road because he did not normally operate a drinking-free tool at that time, and the drinking again was taken as a result of another drinking-free test. At that time, the Defendant was making a stop on the road, the Defendant’s speech was divided into two parts, and the walking was taken off, and the Defendant was smelled in the face. According to the above acknowledged facts, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant’s refusal of drinking-free test was a justifiable reason, and it is also suspected that the Defendant was driving a vehicle under the influence of drinking at that time.