logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2018.02.13 2017고정669
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 28, 2017, at around 05:35, the Defendant driven a vehicle under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking, while driving the front of D Hospital at Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, after receiving 112 report (no. 1162) while driving the front of the D Hospital in the E body under the influence of drinking, from G at the border of the F District of the Kimpo-si Police Station of Kimpo-si, the Defendant appeared to have a response to the reduction of drinking, making a smell and snicking on the face, etc.

Due to reasonable grounds to determine a person, it was demanded that the person comply with the measurement of alcohol in such a way that he/she puts the breath of March 28, 2017, around 05:11, around 205:21, around 30:30 minutes between around 30:31 and around 30 minutes.

그럼에도 불구하고 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정 요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness H, I, and G;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver;

1. Details of the report of the 112 case;

1. The ledger using sobling measuring instruments;

1. The defendant and his/her defense counsel asserted that the defendant did not refuse the measurement of alcohol because he/she had taken a measurement of alcohol to respond to the request of the police officer in charge for the measurement of alcohol.

In this regard, H, a police officer who was measuring drinking and a state of drinking test have been observed.

I, at the time of the measurement of drinking alcohol, the defendant did not make an accurate drinking measurement by preventing the defendant from promptly breathing the measuring instrument and leaving his/her concealment;

The testimony was made, specifically describing the situation at the time, and the credibility of each testimony is recognized, ② the defendant also recognized the fact that he had driven at the time, ③ The pertinent drinking measuring instrument was operated normally before and after the commission of the instant crime, according to the records of the use of drinking meters, it appears that the instant drinking measuring instrument was in a state of malfunction at the time of the instant crime.

(4) there are no circumstances to consider.

arrow