logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.02.03 2015노309
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, in this case, even if the defendant sufficiently proves that the defendant's blood alcohol concentration was at least 0.05% at the time of driving the vehicle, the court below erred by misapprehending the fact that it was not guilty of the facts charged in this case and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination:

A. The lower court acknowledged the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated.

① On May 10, 2014, the Defendant, along with F, from around 20:50 to around 21:20, was in operation by drinking alcohol to his/her taxi from around 21:24, while driving alcohol with F, which he/she walked in his/her taxi, and was in operation suspended by smelling contact accidents at around 21:30.

② The Defendant’s drinking time was about 30 minutes, and the amount of drinking was about 50 minutes, and was about 10 meters away from the scene of the accident. The Defendant’s drinking was about 50 minutes and was about 10 meters away from the scene of the accident.

③ After reporting to the police at around 21:43, G, the 15 minutes elapsed since the agreement on the foregoing accident was properly known, the police was dispatched to the site. After the 22:15 minutes passed from the time of the occurrence of the traffic accident, alcohol concentration was measured at around 22:15, and the measured value was 0.097%.

④ The circumstantial statement report at the time of the alcohol alcohol measurement indicated that the Defendant’s speech and behavior state is “a tag”, “a certain unfluencing”, and “a few red.” However, the witness G, who was the victim of a traffic accident, knew in this court that “at the time consultation with the Defendant about the accident and drinking the alcohol.”

The defendant's walking condition was normal.

The statement was made to the effect that the statement was “rhyd.”

⑤ The instant traffic accident was parked in the front part of the steering direction while driving a vehicle at a speed of not more than 20km per hour from the shooting distance of a narrow runway to the extent that the Defendant would pass by.

arrow