logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2014.04.24 2013노5782
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal of this case is that the defendant was not faced with any danger at the time of the crime of this case, and even if it is recognized that the defendant was faced with any danger, it cannot be deemed that the drinking driving was the only means to avoid this, and the profit to be compensated by the defendant's drinking driving was almost no, while the defendant's driving on an expressway would have caused danger to another person's life and body due to driving on the expressway in drinking condition, and therefore it cannot be recognized as an emergency evacuation. However, the judgment of the court below

2. The facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. At around 03:10 on January 19, 2013, the Defendant driven a volume of car at approximately 30 meters in Cheongdon City, Cheongdon City, Cheongdon-dong, Seoul, Cheongdon-do, the Cheongdon Highway, Cheongdon-do, with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.123% under the influence of alcohol at the vicinity of the stop.

B. The lower court determined as follows: (a) comprehensively taking account of the Defendant, witness D, and E’s legal statements, field pictures, and photographs, the Defendant: (b) caused D, a substitute driver, to drive the vehicle after drinking; (c) caused D to drive the vehicle at the front of the CheongTool, which became the starting part of the Defendant’s vehicle due to the selection of the route; (d) caused the Defendant to stop the vehicle at the front of the Cheongtool; (c) the Defendant, who driven the vehicle at the front of the temporary stop and stopped the vehicle at a level of 30 meters; and (d) controlled the police officer dispatched to the front part of the vehicle at approximately 15 minutes after stopping the vehicle; (d) At the time of regulating, the Defendant was unable to put the Cheongtool at the front part of the vehicle; and (v) The Defendant did not take part in the front part of the temporary stop; and (v) recognized the following facts, but did not take part in the vehicle for the collection of the traffic charge.

arrow