도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.
Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one million won shall be the one day.
Punishment of the crime
On March 13, 2015, at around 03:00 on 03:0, the Defendant driven a car with approximately approximately 60 centimeters in the 51 citizen conference parking zone of Switzerland 51,000, while under the influence of alcohol content 0.183% in blood alcohol content.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. The witness D's oral statement;
1. A traffic accident report (1), (2);
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written reports on running a driver;
1. Relevant laws concerning criminal facts, and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, and selection of fines;
1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;
1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;
1. Judgment on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 186(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act
1. The Defendant’s summary of the assertion: (a) while waiting a substitute driver in the state of drinking, avoiding drillings into the train, working the train, and then, (b) in order to remove the pipe’s sex, and (c) in order to remove the pipe’s sex, the Defendant mispercing the driver’s identity into the train with another vehicle, and (d) intentionally drive the vehicle.
2. The judgment of this court is based on the following circumstances revealed by the aforementioned evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court: ① A passenger car of this case is located after the left side of the Hand, which is a steering gear, and the ebscls are located behind the right side of the hand, so it is not easy to believe that the ebscurine operation and operation of the ebscurine are easy; ② from October 2013, the Defendant set the above ebscur from around 2013, while the ebscurine operated and operated mainly the ebscurine of the above ebscur. However, the Defendant asserted that the ebscurine and the ebscurine of the above ebscurine were confused with the ebscurine of the above ebscurine on the wind of the above ebscurg.