(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.06.12 2020고단920

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.06.12 2020고단920

도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 28, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 from the Seoul Central District Court to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

Around 00:51 on January 12, 2020, the Defendant was driving in the state of alcohol by a police officer D belonging to the Gyeonggi East Police Station, the Defendant was driving in the state of alcohol on the road in front of the wife population B, and was driving in front of the Defendant’s vehicle B, and was able to take hand, and did not comply with a police officer’s request for a measurement of alcohol without justifiable grounds, by avoiding the demand, even though the Defendant was required to take a sob-called alcohol measuring instrument three times from January 12, 2020 to 015 of the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement report, investigation report, notification on the results of the drinking driving control, report on the occurrence of traffic accidents, the report on the occurrence of traffic accidents, the report on the actual condition of traffic accidents and the report on investigation;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Records before judgment: Criminal history records, etc. and application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing summary orders issued by the Seoul Central District Court 2009 High Court Decision 46106;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1), and Article 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the confinement of a workhouse;

1. The Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he had the record of punishment several times due to drinking driving, including the previous conviction in the judgment of the Defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, and the Defendant’s act of refusing to take a drinking alcohol measurement as in this case is considered to be less suitable than the drinking driving.

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case, and the defendant stated in its reasoning.

참조조문

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.05.29 2020고정229

-수원지방법원 2020.11.13 2020고정872

-수원지방법원 2020.06.26 2020고단1704

-광주지방법원 해남지원 2020.06.04 2020고정9

-수원지방법원 2020.10.23 2020고정1152