A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

피고인은 2019. 7. 20. 23:28경 시흥시 B 앞 도로에서 술을 마신 상태에서 C 팰리세이드 승용차를 운전하던 중 시흥경찰서 D 소속 순경 E으로부터 술 냄새가 나고 얼굴에 홍조를 띠는 등 술에 취한 상태에서 운전하였다고 인정할만한 상당한 이유가 있어 약 30분에 걸쳐 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 방법으로 음주측정에 응할 것을 요구받았으나 혈액채취를 하겠다고 주장하여, 2019. 7. 21. 00:05경 시흥시 F에 있는 ‘G병원’으로 이동하여 채혈을 하려고 하였으나 피고인은 다시 호흡측정에 의한 음주측정을 요구하였고, 같은 날 00:40경 재차 호흡측정을 요구받았음에도 불구하고 음주측정을 거부하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness E and H;

1. Statement of the police statement of E;

1. Report on the situation of running a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol;

1. In full view of the investigation report (report on the circumstances of a drinking driver), investigation report (the hospitalCCTV) (the defendant asserted that he only responded to a drinking measurement and did not refuse a drinking measurement. However, in full view of the demand for a drinking measurement and the arrest process acknowledged by the above evidence, the defendant did not agree to respond to a drinking measurement, but did not intend to delay time while refusing a drinking measurement through such doping, and the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is not accepted, since it is judged that this is no different from that of refusing a drinking measurement, since the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion is rejected).

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

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

1. Order to attend lectures under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;