logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.09.17 2020노2095
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In order to apply Articles 148-2(1) and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, prior to the instant crime, it should be recognized that the provision on the prohibition of drunk driving was violated at least twice.

However, in 2014, the defendant has not been punished for driving under the influence of alcohol except for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving under the influence of alcohol).

Therefore, the defendant cannot be deemed as a person who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice, and thus, the above provision cannot be applied.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on Articles 148-2(1) and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, thereby rendering a judgment of conviction for the defendant.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Article 148-2(1) of the Road Traffic Act, amended on December 24, 2018 and enforced from June 25, 2019, provides that “any person who violates Article 44(1) or (2) on at least two occasions, shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for at least two years up to five years, or by a fine of at least ten million won, but not exceeding twenty million won.”

This was revised to "a person who has violated Article 44(1) twice or more and drives a motor vehicle or tram under the influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44(1) again" as "a person who has violated Article 44(1) or (2) twice or more times."

(i) According to the Act before the amendment, the above provision shall apply to a person who drives a motor vehicle on the third occasion, but according to the current Act, the above provision shall apply to a person who drives a motor vehicle on the second occasion under the current Act). Considering this part of the assertion, it appears that the defendant is premised on the application of the Act before the amendment. Since the pertinent motor vehicle driving was committed on September 20, 2019, it is apparent that the current Act in force from June 25, 2019 is applicable.

and records.

arrow