도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the fact) is as follows: (a) the Defendant got on board a vehicle more than one meter and the place where the said vehicle was parked was narrow; and (b) if the Defendant did not drive the vehicle in the latter (R), it is physically impossible to reverse the vehicle as above.
Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the possibility that the Defendant driven a vehicle by driving the vehicle under the condition of parking (P) or neutrality (N) cannot be ruled out. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. On October 30, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating road traffic law (driving alcohol) at the Incheon District Court’s Branch Branch Branch on October 30, 2007, and a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime at the same court on September 26, 2014.
On January 14, 2017, at around 22:57, the Defendant driven a e-learning car under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.148% in the D parking lot located in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).
B. The lower court determined that the Defendant’s act of driving the instant vehicle was proven solely on the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor that the Defendant intentionally committed driving the instant vehicle in the process of driving the instant vehicle without parking (P) or neutrality (N).
It is difficult to see
Based on the judgment, the defendant was acquitted.
(c)
The following circumstances, i.e., the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., the 112 reporter G, from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, i.e., the vehicle of the defendant, as she was placed outside the window due to the sound of the vehicle and xx sound, so she turned out at least 1m following the vehicle of the defendant.