Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On December 11, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) from the Suwon Friwon on December 11, 2009, and a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime in the same court on September 23, 2015.

[ 범죄사실] 피고인은 2020. 8. 15. 21:30 경 화성시 B 인근 도로에서, 화물차를 운전하여 가 던 중 단속 지점 50m 이전에서 골목길로 우회하였는데, 이를 발견하여 추격한 후 피고인을 검거한 화성 서부 경찰서 C 소속 경위 D으로부터 술 냄새가 심하게 나고 눈이 빨갛게 충혈되고 혀가 꼬여 발음이 부정확한 등 술에 취한 상태에서 운전하였다고

인 정할 만한 상당한 이유가 있어 같은 날 21:35 경 약 10분 동안 음주 측정 3회, 같은 날 21:51 경 다른 음주 단속 장소인 화성시 E 앞에서 약 10분 동안 음주 측정 3회 등 총 6회에 걸쳐 음주 측정기에 입김을 불어 넣는 방법으로 음주 측정에 응할 것을 요구 받았음에도 음주측정기에 입김을 불어 넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정 요구에 응하지 않았다.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement report on the circumstances of a driver who is placed in the main place, investigation report (report on the circumstances of the driver who is placed in the main place), and notification of the results of

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, summary order, and other Acts and subordinate statutes, such as criminal history;

1. Article 148-2(1), Article 44(2), and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 2020), Articles 148-2(1), 44(2), and 44(1) of the same Act, the selection of punishment for a crime

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures is to drive drinking again, despite the fact that the defendant had been punished for drinking driving as stated in its reasoning.