A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On September 21, 2013, the Defendant, at around 02:55, 02: (a) 02:55, performed drinking at a mutually influenite in the vicinity of the So-gu So-gu So-gu So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called Si, and (b) stopped on the side of the 41.8km away from the So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called So-called the Defendant was under the control of suspicion of drinking driving from the Party D and the Police Officer, who was dispatched to the scene after receiving a report that drinking would be doubtful.

In the above control place, there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as fluoring off the fluorous nature, fluoring, face, and snow, and fluoring the smelling, etc., the defendant was requested from the fluor D to respond to the request for a measurement of drinking by a police officer by inserting the bluoring a drinking measuring instrument over about 20 minutes, but he did not comply with the request for a measurement of drinking for about 20 minutes without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking driving, and a report on the state of drinking drivers;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning refusal to measure drinking;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act that selects the penalty;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on September 30, 2013 of the Act on the Order to Provide community service and attend lectures is that the Defendant was punished three times due to drinking driving on or around September 10, 2013, by a fine of eight million won prior to the instant crime, including being issued a summary order on or around September 10, 2013, and was punished three times due to drinking driving. However, the Defendant reflects his mistake in depth, and the Defendant is not responsible for driving under the influence of alcohol again after having reported his marriage after filing the instant indictment.