logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.01.13 2015노1731
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the entry of the facts charged in the instant case that the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol on October 17:05, 2014, did not specify the date and time. The Defendant was driving the instant vehicle at around 15:00 on the same day and went to the front road of the instant community hall, and thereafter, he did not drive the vehicle at around 15:00 on the same day. Thus, the judgment of the court below convicting the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The purport of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act stipulating the date, time, place, and method of a crime is to limit the scope of the trial against the court and facilitate the exercise of the defense right by specifying the scope of the defense against the defendant.

Therefore, in light of the nature of the offense charged, it is sufficient to specify the time, place, method, and purpose of the indictment to the extent that it can distinguish the facts causing the prosecution from other facts. Even if part of it is somewhat unclear, it can specify the facts charged by other matters indicated together with the aforementioned facts. Thus, if it does not interfere with the defendant's defense right, it does not affect the validity of the indictment (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006, etc.). The facts charged in the instant case are that the defendant driven around October 17:05, while under the influence of alcohol, while driving around October 21, 2014, the defendant made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of the first instance, that the defendant drinks alcohol from the community hall after driving at around 15:00, the same day as indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, and in light of the fact that the defendant made a statement to the effect that he drinks alcohol at around 150:0 on the same day.

arrow