도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be the day.
Punishment of the crime
On November 24, 2013, around 06:18, the Defendant: (a) driven a rocketing car on the front of the department store in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon. Around November 24, 2013, the Defendant was a taxi engineer and a vision. However, on the grounds that E, who was dispatched upon receipt of a report, was suspected of drunk driving, such as smelling from the Defendant and rhyming the horses in the state of shocking the Defendant’s eye, the Defendant was accompanied to the D Zone of the Daejeon Western Police Station, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, and did not comply with the request of the Defendant for a drinking test on four occasions, but did not comply
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Each legal statement of the witness EF;
1. Determination as to the defendant's assertion of the report on detection of a host driver
1. The key issue is that the Defendant was unlawfully arrested and was required to take a drinking test in the D District Unit.
According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the Defendant was arrested in the act of committing a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the D District Zone, and was not arrested on the front of the department store.
However, the police officer's act of moving the defendant to the D District Unit constitutes a substantial arrest, and all evidence submitted by the prosecutor is inadmissible as evidence of illegal collection.
2. Facts found based on evidence submitted by the prosecutor;
A. The Defendant called up for police officers at a place where criminal facts are stated. The Defendant reported 112 in the process, and the Defendant reported 112, and the EF sent to the scene on board the police vehicle.
The police officer E who arrived at the site from the defendant, the police officer F, after hearing the opinion separate from G and confirming the facts, did not cause personal or material injury to each other, and the status of the dispute has not been terminated even though the defendant continuously raised an objection.
G was somewhat a few years of age in the dispute between the defendant and the police officer, and "the defendant is driving a drinking."