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 April 22, 2019, at around 00:10 on April 22, 2019, the Defendant was requested to comply with a drinking test by inserting it into a drinking measuring instrument three times from around 01:15 to 01:30 on the same day, but the Defendant was refused to comply with a drinking test by inserting it into a drinking measuring instrument at a police officer’s request for a drinking test without justifiable grounds, on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking, smelling, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, drinking, etc. from D District Assistant E in the Suwonnam Police Station of the Suwon-gu Police Station, the Defendant called out after receiving 112 report that “C vehicle driven while driving under the influence of alcohol

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement;

1. Report on the occurrence of the case, and report on the internal investigation;

1. The circumstantial statement statement and investigation report of the employer (the circumstantial report of the employer-employed driver);

1. Application of photographs related to drinking driving, and Acts and subordinate statutes concerning refusal to measure drinking;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The crime of this case with the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is deemed to be not in compliance with the measurement of drinking alcohol by a police officer who driven while drinking alcohol after receiving a report 112, and the quality of the crime is not less severe, and the defendant has a record of being punished by a fine due to being discovered by drinking alcohol driving in 2010 and 2018.

However, considering the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, that there is no record that the defendant has been punished for a stay of execution or more yet, and that there is no record of the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account the various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records