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 May 16, 2020, the Defendant was exposed to the Ethical police box belonging to the brigade Police Station and F of the Senior Police Station, who was called up after receiving 112 report while driving a coos car in front of B on the street, around May 21, 2020.

When there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driven while under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling alcohol at the time, reding, etc., the Defendant refused to put the breath in the breath in a breath alcohol measuring instrument by inserting the above circumstances E and the breath F three times, but refused to put the breath in the breath measuring instrument without any justifiable reason.

As a result, the Defendant did not comply with a police officer’s demand for alcohol testing without any justifiable reason despite the fact that he violated the prohibition of drinking driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on driving under influence of alcohol, investigation report (report on the circumstances of a drinking driver), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning visual images rejecting measurement;

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

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

1. The fact that there is a record of drinking twice the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the confession of the crime in this case, the reason why the drinking driving and the refusal of drinking alcohol measurement was made, and the occupation, age, environment, etc. of the defendant;