도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
1. On June 20, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 00:56 on June 20, 2015, the Defendant was required to take a alcohol test for approximately three occasions by inserting the 30 minutes in the emergency room for the hospital to which the fleet was assigned, after receiving a suspected suspicion of drinking, while driving a motor vehicle with low drinking on the two roads near the 2nd Y-ro, Hongsan-gun, Hongsan-gun, Hongnam-gun, a teacher of the Donsan-gun.
Nevertheless, the defendant has avoided and refused this, and failed to comply with a police officer's request for drinking alcohol measurement without justifiable grounds.
2. Determination
A. The burden of proof on the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to confident the judge that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant, the interest of the defendant should be determined by the interests of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001, etc.). (B) The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted and examined by the court are as follows: (i) the defendant was driven by a telegraph while the defendant was driven by a utility pole, cut a telegraph and covered by the roof of the defendant driven by the utility pole, and the defendant was covered by the accident; and (ii) the defendant continued to have been affected by the brain syke, syke, and sykes of the front wall that require medical treatment for three weeks; and (iii) the court given the above hospital head to the dry University.