logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2014.08.08 2014고단1483
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Reasons

Criminal facts

On April 20, 2014, at around 21:15, the Defendant was required to respond to the alcohol test by inserting the breathr at around 30 minutes of alcohol, such as smelling and smelling on the face of a police box affiliated with the police box called up after receiving a report after driving a brear under the influence of drinking at the parking lot of the Ansan-si Hospital in Ansan-si, Ansan-si, 123, the Defendant was in compliance with the alcohol test by inserting the whole breathr for about 120 minutes of drinking.

Nevertheless, the defendant avoided this and did not comply with the police officer's request for a drinking test without any justifiable reason.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Occurrence of a case under the Road Traffic Act;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on detection of a drinking driver and the ledger of use of a drinking measuring instrument;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of sentencing)

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. is a case where the defendant refused a police officer's request for alcohol alcohol measurement without justifiable grounds, and the defendant's mistake is against the defendant's depth while recognizing the crime of this case, and the defendant reflects his mistake. The defendant has no ability to punish the fine in excess of the fine, and all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the trial of this case shall be determined as ordered only once in consideration of the favorable circumstances such as the defendant's failure

arrow