logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.12.22.선고 2014고단6351 판결
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Cases

2014 Highest 6351 Violation of the Road Traffic Act

Defendant

A

Prosecutor

The on-site (prosecution) and the stuffing type (public trial)

Defense Counsel

Attorney B (Korean National Assembly)

Imposition of Judgment

December 22, 2014

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant shall be ordered to provide community service for 200 hours, such as nature protection activities, welfare facilities, group service activities, public facilities service activities, etc.

Reasons

Criminal facts

【Criminal Power】

On January 14, 2005, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of one million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Changwon District Court on February 14, 2005, a fine of one million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Changwon District Court on February 14, 2005, and at the Changwon District Court on August 23, 201, a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Changwon District Court on August 23, 201, and a fine of three million won.

【Criminal Facts】

On March 30, 2014, around 00:37, the Defendant was required to respond to the drinking test by inserting approximately 20 minutes a part of the alcohol measuring instrument in a manner that makes it difficult for the Defendant to be deemed to have driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling and smelling on the face from the traffic department of the Busan Gangseo Police Station, and from D in the position where the Defendant was affiliated with the traffic department of the Gangseo-gu Police Station, while driving Cysta car on the front of the signal bridge in Busan Gangseo-gu, Busan.

그럼에도 피고인은 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Some of the statements made by the prosecution against the accused in the examination protocol of suspect;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving under the influence of alcohol, inquiry into the results of the crackdown on driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the situation of drinking drivers, and investigation report;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, Selection of imprisonment

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (Taking into account various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of the instant case, such as the background, contents, criminal records, criminal records, age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the instant crime)

1. Social service order;

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges

Judge Benefitshos

arrow