Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On October 12, 2012, the Defendant: (a) is a person driving a Cuskn vehicle on his own; (b) is driving the vehicle on the front road of Gangnam-gu Seoul, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, while under the influence of alcohol concentration under the influence of alcohol concentration under the influence of alcohol concentration.

On October 12, 2012, 4:38, 2012, D, which is a traffic control police officer, demanded the first alcohol alcohol test, but rejected it. On the same day, 4:48, the second alcohol test was requested, but again rejected it. On the same day, around 5:03, 5:03, the third alcohol test was requested, but it was rejected without justifiable reasons.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. E statements;

1. Report on actions taken against an employer, and report on the status of an employer-employed driver;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing drinking practice;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, which choose the penalty for the crime;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order [the scope of punishment] The crime of this case, which is KRW 5 million to KRW 10 million, was committed by the defendant at the time of the criminal act of this case, even though the defendant was requested by a taxi engineer and a police officer dispatched while driving under the influence of alcohol and was in the state of stop, he refused to take a drinking test without justifiable grounds, and the refusal to take a drinking test is more poor than the case where the defendant was discovered to respond to a measurement after driving under the influence of alcohol, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in this case, the defendant's mistake is recognized and reflected in all of his errors in the court, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the previous previous criminal conviction, and the distance of the vehicle driven at the time is not clear, and the defendant's request for formal trial against the summary order of a fine of KRW 5 million issued to the defendant in this case. Thus, the punishment of the summary order is more than that of the summary order in accordance with the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous changes (Article 457-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act).