A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around 22:30 on June 23, 2014, the Defendant driven a CK7 car without obtaining a driver’s license in the section of about 4 km from the front side of a week where it is impossible to find out the trade name in the legal lusium, from the front side of a week where it is impossible to find out the trade name in the legal lusium at the original city to the front side of the HON KK factory in the same lusium.

2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of Drinking Measures) caused a traffic accident while driving the said vehicle while under the influence of alcohol at the direction of the NexEX factory in front of the LexEX factory at the front of the said temporary border. The Defendant was requested to comply with a drinking test by inserting the breathm from around 00:5 on June 24, 2014 to around 01:30 on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant driven the said vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, such as she was under the influence of alcohol, such as she was under the influence of alcohol, she was under the influence of alcohol, and she was under the influence of alcohol by inserting the 112 report.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not take a sobage test and did not comply with a police officer’s request for a sobage test without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports, reports on the situation of driving on the driving on a motor vehicle, and the register of driver's licenses;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act that choose a penalty (the refusal of drinking alcohol measurement, the choice of imprisonment), Article 152 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act, and Articles 152 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope of adding up long-term punishments);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had had the same criminal record at several times, the defendant has the criminal record of several times including the same criminal record, and the defendant has the criminal record of several times, and the attitude of the instant crime and the list of circumstantial evidence after the crime is committed.