A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won on September 16, 201, a fine of five million won on October 28, 2013, a fine of five million won on October 28, 201, and a suspended sentence on June 9, 2015 by imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

피고인은 2020. 7. 20. 01:34경 의정부시 의정부1동에 있는 가능역 부근 길에서 의정부시 B 앞길까지 C 크라이슬러 승용차를 운전하였고, 112신고를 받고 출동한 의정부경찰서 D지구대 소속 순경 E으로부터, 피고인에게서 술 냄새가 나고 얼굴에 홍조를 띠며 비틀거리고, 음주감지기에 음주가 감지되는 등 술에 취한 상태에서 운전하였다고 인정할 만한 상당한 이유가 있어, 같은 날 01:58경부터 15분간에 걸쳐 음주 측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 방법으로 음주측정에 응할 것을 요구받고도 측정기 불대를 물지 않고 바람을 부는 시늉만 하여 측정을 거부하고는 바로 맥주를 마시는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 공무원의 음주측정요구에 응하지 않았다.

Accordingly, the defendant was found to have driven a drinking or refused a drinking test at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the status of running a motor vehicle under consideration, report on the circumstances of the driver under consideration, investigation report (report on the circumstances of the driver under consideration), and investigation report (the status of refusal of measurement);

1. Application of inquiry letters, copies of written judgments, field photographs and 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. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant again commits the instant crime even though he/she had a previous conviction, including the previous conviction on which a suspended sentence was sentenced, even though he/she had been convicted of drinking. The instant crime has the nature of obstruction of performance of official duties, and the quality of the crime is not sufficient, the interval between the previous conviction on the same kind of drinking, and other ages of the defendant.