beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On April 18, 2017, at around 01:40, the Defendant driven a C-new car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 100 meters from a section of approximately 100 meters of alcohol during blood to the front road of the Gangdong-gu Seoul, Gangdong-ro, Gangdong-gu, Seoul, for a while under the influence of alcohol by 0.158%.
Summary of Evidence
1. Partial statement of the defendant;
1. Legal statement of the witness D;
1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on driving drinking and a written statement of control;
1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning coal application and reflectivity;
1. Relevant Article 148-2 (2) 2 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines concerning facts constituting an offense, and the selection of fines;
1. Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act concerning the custody of the workhouse (the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted that the Defendant and the defense counsel only driven the Defendant’s vehicle to the extent that E would easily find a substitute driver, and that E does not have any means to drive the Defendant’s vehicle.
In full view of the following circumstances duly adopted by this Court, the above argument is without merit.
(1) The statements of E are not reliable for the following reasons:
E was present at this court twice more than twice, and stated that the defendant was present as witness in this court that the defendant was driving his vehicle from the sttel parking lot to the 93-hyri road by cutting the Central Fladro's building (written theme building) and by bypassing it, and the defendant returned to the sttel to the sttel so that the driver was allowed to meet, and the defendant returned to the sttel.
However, at the time, the defendant was in a state to the extent that he left the fluor, and in such a case, it is general that the substitute driver will arrive and take the fluor and take the place on the fluor, but E went to go without leaving the defendant's fluor.
was stated.
Even if the substitute driving at the time was F, not E, but F, so if he was aware of the location of the vehicle of the defendant, the substitute driver is a telephone call between E and F in order to inform it.