A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 16, 2017, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking alcohol to the Defendant from the E-line of the Incheon Southern Police Station E-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, which was called to the site due to a traffic accident, while driving a DN motor vehicle on the front of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City C at around 08:30 on December 16, 2017, and driving it under the influence of alcohol.

Due to reasonable grounds, there was a demand for responding to the measurement of drinking in such a manner as to put the whole in a drinking measuring instrument three times at the same place, such as around 09:15, 09:20, 09:25, etc. on the same day.

Nevertheless, the defendant, in a manner that does not take part in a drinking measuring instrument, failed to comply with a police officer's drinking test without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each investigation report (on-site conditions, etc. and report on the situation of the driver at the main place);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a statement on the circumstances of a driver placed in the main place and a report on detection of such driver;

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

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. In full view of the facts that the Defendant’s reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Attend a lecture or the Order of Community Service is not good in the course of the instant crime that the Defendant refused to measure drinking, and that the Defendant was punished five times for the same type of crime, such as drinking driving or unlicensed driving, and that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration was considerably high at the time when the Defendant was discovered through drinking driving in 2015 and that the Defendant’s crime of refusing to drive drinking or to measure drinking requires strict punishment in light of social risks.

However, the circumstances are favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognized his mistake at present and divided, the fact that human and material damage has not occurred due to traffic accidents, and the fact that there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine.