beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2019.07.25 2019고단1542

도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of eight million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 9, 2019, at around 00:40, the Defendant was under the influence of police officers while driving a 4 km section from the front side of Yagu, Ansan-si to the front side of the Diplomatic Association in Ansan-si, Ansan-si. The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol to the Eman of the Yagu Police Station, who was under the influence of alcohol control, and was under the influence of the police officers during the escape while driving the vehicle as it is, after undergoing a drinking reduction test.

The Defendant, at around 00:50 on the same day, had reasonable grounds to recognize that he was driven under the influence of alcohol by the above police officers, such as smelling, influoring, in an inaccurate, unfluoring, walking, etc. from the above police officers, in front of the upper water course of the same day at 48, Ansan-si, Ansan-si, the Defendant failed to comply with the breath test by a police officer, without justifiable grounds, even though he was required to comply with the breathing test by inserting the whole breath for about 29 minutes from around the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement under the circumstances of the driving of a motor vehicle;

1. The application of statutes to the ledger of the use of the divers for drunk driving [the decision of exclusion from evidence: the report of release of a suspect (Evidence No. 16) is not submitted as evidence and is submitted as a document attached to the written indictment, and thus cannot be deemed legitimate evidence];

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018);

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is already the same crime, and there is a need to strictly punish a person who has violated the traffic laws and regulations, even though he/she had a record of violating the same kind of crime.

However, there are more than 10 years of such power, and there are no power exceeding fines, and there are favorable circumstances for the defendant such as the effect of the punishment exceeding fines on the occupation.