(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.12.17 2020노486 | 리걸엔진

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) 광주지방법원 2020.12.17 2020노486

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the situation at the time of drinking driving in this case cannot be considered as an urgent danger, and even though it is difficult to see that driving under the influence of alcohol was the only means to escape from the danger, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the ground that driving under the influence of alcohol constitutes an emergency evacuation under Article 22 (1) of the

2. Determination

A. On February 26, 2019, at around 19:37, the Defendant driven the Category B K5 car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of approximately 1m in blood on the front of the Seo-gu Agricultural Park in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju.

B. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the records of this case, in order to reduce traffic obstruction and risk of accident, the Defendant appears to have driven a vehicle more than 1m vehicle on the right side of the one-way road, and there was no intention to drive the vehicle. In light of the blood alcohol concentration of the Defendant at the time and the distance from which the Defendant moved a vehicle, the risk that may occur to the life and safety of another person by the Defendant’s act was not significant, whereas the legal interests secured by the Defendant’s act are more likely than the above infringement of the legal interests.

The defendant's act of driving as stated in the facts charged of this case is an act to avoid the present danger to his or other person's legal interests, and thus, constitutes an emergency evacuation under Article 22 (1) of the Criminal Act.

① The Defendant left a substitute driver to return home under influence of alcohol, and the above substitute driver brought about a dispute between the Defendant and the driver while driving, and left the driver’s seat in front of the Seo-gu Agricultural Park in Gwangju, Seo-gu.

② The above stop location is the beginning of one-way road, and the driver of the vehicle by proxy is the driver.

참조조문

-형법 제22조 제1항

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2019.6.5.선고 2019고정162 판결

-서울중앙지법 2020. 3. 23. 선고 2019고정2908 판결

-창원지방법원 2019.06.05 2019고정162

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.03.23 2019고정2908

-수원지방법원 2015.07.24 2015노347