beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment for three years from the date of the final judgment.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On January 26, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court on January 26, 2007, and on September 28, 2017, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court branch office.
On August 19, 2020, at around 03:25, the Defendant was required to take a alcohol test from the above E on August 19, 2020, but failed to comply with the demand for a alcohol test, on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize the Defendant to have driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol at a drinking-free engine presented by E to the police officer belonging to the Kim Jong-do Police Station D police box, while driving the C C C C C in the neighboring street in the city of Kimhae-si, Kim, the Defendant was at the influence of alcohol at the influence of alcohol.
As a result, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving and the prohibition of refusal to take a drinking test more than twice.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on the control results of drinking driving, report on the state of a drinking driver's standing statement, and previous records indicated in an investigation report (report on the state of a drinking driver): The application of Acts and subordinate statutes on criminal records, etc.;
1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act include the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment, background leading to the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the present argument, even though the Defendant had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had a same criminal history twice