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

[Criminal Power] On September 28, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court on September 28, 2007, and violated the prohibition of drinking driving regulations.

【Criminal Facts】

Around 23:10 on October 19, 2019, the Defendant was in the second floor parking lot in front of the Daegu-gu B building C, Daegu-gu, and the Defendant was required to comply with a drinking test by inserting the breathm in a manner of putting the breath in front of the right side of the said car and the front door of the parking lot with the penter and the steering part of the said car while parking the D Lasta car. Upon receiving a resident’s report, the Defendant was under significant grounds to recognize that he was under the influence of alcohol, such as making the Defendant take a breath from the border F belonging to the Seongbuk Police Station E Zone, and making the Defendant take a breath from the Defendant’s entrance and breath of the face, and making the Defendant take a breath and breath from the light

Nevertheless, the Defendant explicitly refused to take a drinking test that “if he was aware of his driving, and he does not refuse to take a breath test, he did not comply with the drinking test by a police officer without justifiable reasons.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigative reports (in relation to the investigation ofCCTV images, etc.), investigation reports on cases of violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of noise measurement) and investigation reports on such violations (in relation to the investigation of CCTV images);

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Photographs related to accidents;

1. Criminal records as indicated in the judgment: Criminal records, investigation reports (examination of the same kind of records), and summary order (Tagu Seo-Support 2007 High Court Decision 11679) shall apply to the statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act requires that the defendant does not drive a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and the measurement of the drinking of police officials.