A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 21, 2018, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties, 21:40 on the road near Pyeongtaek-si B, “A vehicle that drinked while driving alcohol was boomed with a utility pole.”

“A police officer affiliated with the Pyeongtaek-gu Police Station C police box called to the scene after receiving a report of 112, who took the part of the content, took a bath to D, and assaulted D with D’s shoulder shoulder, face, hand, and hand knife D’s shoulder, and interfered with police officers’ legitimate performance of duties concerning the handling of reported cases and the handling of traffic accidents.

2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of alcohol measurement) The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, such as the time and time set forth in paragraph (1) of this Article, and the distance between the Defendant and the Defendant’s bath, while driving a sprink car while drinking alcohol at a place set forth in paragraph (1) of this Article, and reported that the Defendant caused a traffic accident by driving the sprink car, and the Defendant was smelled at the Defendant’s entrance, and the Defendant was able to take a bath and walked.

Even though there are reasonable grounds to determine a person, even though he/she has been requested to respond to the measurement of drinking by inserting three times a drinking measuring instrument from around 21:48 on May 21, 2018 to around 21:58, he/she may not make a measurement of drinking because he/she has failed to drive a drinking, even though he/she has been requested to comply with the measurement of drinking by inserting three times a drinking measuring instrument.

Does it be why alcohol is measured.

H. “A police officer did not comply with a police officer’s demand for alcohol testing without justifiable grounds by explicitly refusing to measure alcohol consumption.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A written statement of the G production;

1. A damaged photograph;

1. A copy of the ledger of reports on detection of drivers engaged in driving;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on internal investigation reports (No. 8 of the evidence list);

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of the Criminal Act (Interference with the performance of official duties), Articles 148-2(1)2 and 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act (which means refusal of measurement of drinking), and each decision of imprisonment with prison labor.