logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.10.28 2019노2273
교통사고처리특례법위반(치상)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant does not explicitly and objectively express his intention to refuse to measure drinking, and thus, the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act is not guilty.

B. The charge of violating the Road Traffic Act (refluence of the measurement) is not guilty, and the victims' intention not to punish him/her must be dismissed.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the defendant explicitly and objectively expressed his intention to refuse to measure alcohol in light of the part of the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal to measure alcohol).

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

1) At the time when a police officer was called to the scene of an accident, the Defendant was sneeped with smelling, and the Defendant was snicked in a driver’s seat, and the Defendant was found to have been driving under the influence of alcohol even when he was measured at an emergency room of a hospital. As such, there was a considerable reason to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol. 2) After a police officer’s breath of alcohol by sobreath, the Defendant was found to have been under the influence of alcohol, and subsequently

3) A police officer I stated that, at the time of the measurement of alcohol in an emergency room, the Defendant was somewhat crossing, but did not seem to have been able to take a breath test. In light of the fact that the Defendant was unable to properly express awareness or express his/her intent due to an accident at the time when the Defendant was in the emergency room, in light of the fact that the Defendant was in the emergency room and the time when the Defendant was in the emergency room and the time when the notice of the result of the influence on drinking driving was issued, the police officer did not request the Defendant to take a breath test at least three minutes at intervals of five minutes.

arrow