logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원 2020.08.18 2020고단475
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one and half years.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

Since the defendant is led to confession, it is necessary to make an additional statement on the same part as the relevant supporting evidence in the same way as “(see, e.g., the page of the evidence record).”

Based on evidence, the prosecutor's facts charged are modified to the extent that it does not adversely affect the defendant's right of defense and actually affect the contents of the facts charged, and it does not result in the change of the subject of trial by the court.

On December 22, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3,00,000 for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence refusal) at the Chuncheon District Court on December 22, 2009 (see the evidence record No. 82). On July 3, 2013 (See the evidence No. 78), the Seoul High Court (see the evidence record No. 78), which was sentenced to a suspended sentence for 6 months on July 11, 2013 and became final and conclusive on July 11, 2013.

(See Article 77 of the Evidence Records). On February 28, 2020, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on February 28, 2020 (see Article 9 of the Evidence Record) and was under the influence of alcohol on February 28, 2020, the traffic accident involving the F. “L.-T.R. car” while driving a motor vehicle in approximately 800 meters away from the Do heading City/Do to the front road located in Chuncheon City/Do.

Therefore, on the ground that there is a reasonable ground to recognize that the police officer belonging to the G District Unit, who was called to the site for the investigation of a traffic accident, H, was smelled by the defendant, was sneeped by the defendant, and the defendant was not able to have driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, such as a big distance, he requested the defendant to respond to the drinking test for about 20 minutes.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not comply with the blood alcohol measurement. The Defendant stated that “I am dynasium 10 illness. I dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium dynasium 23” (see evidence record No. 23)

Accordingly, the defendant is prohibited from drinking driving and refusing to measure drinking.

arrow