Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 22, 2018, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle by Belgium D while drinking the front road of Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul at around 05:52, while driving the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant driven the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol by drinking alcohol to the Defendant from F of the police box affiliated with the police box belonging to the Seoul Suwon Police Station Emba, Seoul, the Defendant driven the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

Due to reasonable grounds, there was a demand for responding to the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately 15 minutes into a drinking measuring instrument.

그럼에도 피고인은 음주 측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Statement of the circumstances, investigation report (report on the circumstances of the driver in charge of the primary duty) and control report;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning video data CDs;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

2. Article 70 (1) and Article 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse.

3. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act concerning the order of provisional payment.

4. Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (the grounds for conviction)

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant was requested by a police officer to take a drinking test, and 40 parts of the respiratorys over 40 times, and complied with the test in good faith, but the Defendant did not have a breathe and respiratory difficulties.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, namely, ① Police Officers G did not take a drinking test at the time in this court, because the Defendant did not put the breath amount to the degree of breath that could have been measured, and Police Officers G testified to the effect that the Defendant did not put the breath amount into the breath amount.