logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2020.01.15 2019고단2709
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 17, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (recovering to take a noise level measurement) in the Daejeon District Court's Incheon District Court's Branch.

On September 15, 2019, at around 23:10 on September 23:10, 2019, the Defendant was driving a D-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W

Accordingly, there were reasonable grounds to recognize that a person was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling, smelling, singinging, etc. the Defendant on the face of the police box affiliated with the police box dispatched after receiving 112 report, and thus, it was demanded from 23:40 to 23:58 of the same day to respond to the measurement of alcohol by inserting the breath in front of the above Cresh points.

그럼에도 피고인은 음주측정기에 입김을 불어 넣는 시늉만 하거나 명시적으로 음주측정을 거부하며 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣지 아니함으로써 이를 회피하여 경찰공무원의 측정에 응하지 아니하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Investigation report by the accused on the legal statement (on-site and disposition of refusal of drinking measurement);

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (Attachment to the same type of judgment, etc.);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on probation and an order to attend the course of education was imposed four times or more by the defendant for the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the defendant again committed the crime of refusing to measure alcohol in this case even though he was punished by a fine for the violation of the Road Traffic Act in 2011, even though he had the record of being punished by a fine due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (e.g., refusal of measurement).

arrow