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 December 18, 2009, the defendant was issued a summary order of 2.5 million won by the Seoul Eastern District Court due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act.

The defendant is a driver of BMW X6 car.

around 04:25 on April 9, 2020, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the front of the “D” road located in the Namyang-si, Namyang-si, Seoul, while driving the said vehicle on the road, but was temporarily parked to the signal atmosphere.

The Defendant was demanded from F to comply with the so-called “bMW vehicle on the road” to take a so-called alcohol test by inserting the whole breath in a so-called alcohol measuring instrument, on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as bMW vehicle’s being on the road, 112 reported telephone and being dispatched to the said scene, she snife, snife, snife, snick on the face of the Defendant, and so on.

그럼에도 피고인은 음주측정기에 입김을 불어 넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the Road Traffic Act prohibition regulations at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. List of reported cases 112 written circumstantial statements of the drinking driver;

1. Investigation reports (report on the circumstances of an employee) and investigation reports;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, and copies of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1), 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The defendant has a record of being punished for drinking-driving even before the reason for sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act.

Nevertheless, while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of re-driving, the motor vehicle did not comply with the demand for alcohol measurement.

However, the defendant is not a party.