The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. Around 05:00 on August 5, 2012, the Defendant: (a) while driving a D Atop car on the street in front of the building south-gu C, South-gu; (b) caused an accident involving car-taking by E, a neighboring resident, who was parked in the vicinity; and (c) on the same day, E directly observed the said accident at its home in the same Dong, and reported the accident to the police at around 05:22 on the same day.

At around 05:27 on the same day, the police officer assigned to the G police box at the Posnnam Police Station at the port and the police officer I called the Defendant’s residence on the same day. At the time, the Defendant was snicked, sniffed in the entrance, and sniffed in an inaccurate state, and the Defendant was sniffed in an inaccurate state, and voluntarily carried out the vehicle by using the G police box located in the same GuJ. On the same day, the G police box at the time requested the Defendant to take a alcohol test three times in total between 06:34 and 06:55 on the same day, but the Defendant refused to take a alcohol test in a manner that does not have a alcohol measuring instrument.

As a result, although there is a considerable reason to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant did not comply with the measurement without justifiable reason.

2. Even though it is not deemed necessary for traffic safety and prevention of danger under the interpretation of Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, in case where there are reasonable grounds to recognize that a driver has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, and it is necessary to confirm whether a driver has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, considering the objective circumstances at the time of the request for a drinking test, a police officer may request the driver concerned to take a drinking test. Where the driver concerned fails to comply with it, the crime of non-compliance with a drinking test prescribed in the same Act is established, but it is evident that a drinking test cannot be confirmed by the post-driving test