A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four 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

At around 17:00 on March 14, 2018, the Defendant refused to take a measurement of a police officer’s demand for alcohol testing at a “D” restaurant located in the Busan metropolitan area C, with the notification of 112 that “a traffic accident or the other party makes a drinking; the same shall apply hereinafter)” and obstructed police officers’ performance of duties concerning the measurement of legitimate drinking by driving on the top of the above slope, thereby obstructing police officers from getting out of the restaurant, while refusing to take a measurement of the police officer’s demand for alcohol testing.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. In the course of an investigation report (related to dispatch to the scene), a photograph of police officer's damage, a photo, a criminal investigation report, and a criminal investigation report (related to the statement of a reporter), the defendant and his/her defense counsel cannot be deemed lawful in the performance of duties by a police officer concerning drinking measurement. The police officer's title in the process of protesting against the defect in the police officer's suppression of the defendant by reason of his/her refusal to measure drinking, and thus, the police officer's failure to perform his/her duties is not established.

The argument is asserted.

However, the arrest of the defendant in the act of committing the crime of this case was caused by the obstruction of the defendant's execution of official duties, and the exercise of force against the defendant also seems to have occurred in the process of arresting the defendant in the act

In addition, in relation to the measurement of drinking, the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, and the police officer who received a report on the other driver's side after the accident occurred, was in the restaurant before the other driver was called. In light of these circumstances, the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

Since there are reasonable grounds to determine a person, police officers may request the measurement of drinking, and the defendant is obligated to comply with it (Article 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act), and police officers are obliged to comply with it.