logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2013.10.25 2013노1896
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant of mistake of facts was unable to take a drinking test at a police officer’s request for a drinking test, and did not refuse to do so.

B. The sentence of a fine of five million won imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Where it is deemed necessary to ensure the safety of traffic and prevent danger, or where there exist reasonable grounds to recognize that a driver has driven a motor vehicle, etc. while under the influence of alcohol and it is necessary to confirm whether a driver has driven the motor vehicle, the police officer may request the driver to take a drinking test pursuant to Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act unless it is clear that the driver cannot confirm whether the driver has driven the motor vehicle by means of an ex post facto drinking test, and where the driver has refused it, the crime of non-compliance with the drinking test referred to in Article 148-2 (1)

(Supreme Court Decision 201Do1012 Decided March 29, 2012). The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below are found in the location of the site where the vehicle was dispatched after receiving a report that the vehicle is left on the road at around October 19, 2012. At the time, the defendant saw the defendant as the owner of the vehicle at the location of the site where the vehicle was called after being reported that the vehicle was left on the road at around October 23, 2012. At the time, the defendant saw the red light in his face and the snow was snicked, and the drinking walk was snicked at the entrance, and ② the above D police box was driven voluntarily by the defendant E while the above D police box was driven in the above box, and the F police station belonging to Busan was demanded by the defendant to voluntarily take a drinking measuring device at the above slope, and the defendant was not able to determine whether or not to refuse to take a drinking test.

arrow