logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2019.05.17 2019고단192
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On January 12, 2019, at around 03:07, the Defendant was demanded to take a drinking test by inserting the alcohol measuring instrument three minutes from around 03:25 to 03:35 minutes on the same day on the day, when the Defendant driven a rocketing car in the direction of drinking on the front of the “C” restaurant located in the Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Annsan-si, Annsan-gu, Annsan-gu, Police Station E-gu, which was sent after receiving a report of suspicion of drunk driving, and was locked from F to the Defendant, and thus, he was found to have driven while under the influence of drinking on three occasions from around 03:25 to around 03:35 of the same day.

Nevertheless, the Defendant avoided a drinking test and did not comply with a police officer’s request for a drinking test without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the situation of running a driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the results of crackdown on driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the situation of a driver under the influence of alcohol, and investigation report (report on the status of a

1. Reports on internal investigation, investigation reports, investigation reports and investigation reports;

1. The user ledger of the measuring instruments for drinking;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of penalty, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation: The fact that there are several records of punishment including the suspended sentence for the same crime, and in particular, on November 17, 2016, the court has been sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, etc., even though it had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc., of Specific Crimes, which seems to lack compliance spirit and safety awareness with traffic regulations by repeating the instant crime at least three months after the expiration of the suspended sentence period: It is against the recognition of the crime.

arrow