beta
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2020.11.30 2020노788

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s act of mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles is inevitable in the course of confirming the occurrence of a drilling accident, even if a substitute engineer was driving the Defendant’s vehicle in the parking lot at the Defendant’s residence, and caused a sudden rejection of the accident, and constitutes an emergency evacuation or a justifiable act. Even if it does not fall under domestic affairs, the Defendant was aware that his driving did not constitute a crime, and there was justifiable reasons for recognizing the same.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below (the fine of five million won, the suspended sentence of two years) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the lower court’s argument of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant alleged that the Defendant’s act constitutes an emergency evacuation or a justifiable act. The lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty of driving under the title of “judgment on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion” in the said judgment and found the Defendant guilty of driving under drinking

In light of the circumstances stated by the court below, the following facts are as follows: ① confirming an accident that has already occurred does not fall under the purpose of avoiding the present danger of one’s legal interests; ② It is difficult to see that there is an urgent need to confirm the Defendant’s driving on the same job by means of drinking alcohol; and ② it does not constitute an emergency evacuation or a justifiable act.

In addition, even if examining the defendant's assertion or record, it was recognized that the defendant's act of taking one meter for the above purpose does not constitute a drunk driving, and therefore, it is not a subjective crime for domestic affairs, since there is no reason to believe that it is not a drunk driving.

Even if there is a justifiable reason to recognize the same, it cannot be said that there was a justifiable reason.

The judgment of the court below is just and there are errors.