logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.11.09 2016고정1280
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is C Carren driver.

On August 17, 2016, the Defendant driven the said vehicle at approximately onem distance in the E-cafeteria parking lot located in Yangsan-si D around 23:34 on August 17, 2016, in the blood alcohol concentration of 0.124%.

2. Determination:

A. The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence with probative value that leads the judge to believe that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is any doubt as to the defendant's conviction, the conviction cannot be judged even if there is any doubt as to the defendant's conviction (see Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006, etc.). (b) The police called the E-cafeteria (hereinafter "the instant restaurant"). In light of the fact that the defendant was seated in the driver's seat of the defendant's vehicle in which the defendant was working, and that the vehicle of this case was parked unfolded in the direction of 1 to 2 meters from the parking space, etc., at the time of driving the vehicle of this case, there is a possibility that the defendant would have driven the vehicle of this case.

I seem to appear.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, i.e., (i) the Defendant used the police force of the Defendant’s vehicle at the time of the instant case and did not drive the vehicle, but did not drive the vehicle.

The statement was made in this court, and the statement was made to the same purpose, and ② the witness F considered the defendant to drive the defendant's vehicle in the investigative agency.

Although submitting a statement to the effect that “the Defendant would not directly see the driving of the vehicle” in this Court.

The vehicle was under the influence of alcohol, but the vehicle was not parked in the parking space and was driven in another place.

It is also well-known that he took a large amount of alcohol and took a horse.

arrow