(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.12.14 2017노1026

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) 서울서부지방법원 2017.12.14 2017노1026

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant's voluntary blood collection consent was obtained under the circumstance that he/she had a mental capacity;

Therefore, the defendant was driven under the influence of 0.204%.

shall not be appointed by a person.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court also asserted the same purport, and the lower court, based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, found the following facts or circumstances, namely, at the time, the Defendant was measured at 0.112% of alcohol level in blood in response to the breath measurement, and the police officer D instructed the Defendant to collect and re-measurement blood, thereby notifying the Defendant that blood would be recovered and re-measurement the blood. In response, the Defendant indicated that he was under the blood type column in blood collection consent, and indicated that he was “the blood collection consent” as “the Defendant’s blood collection consent” after marking the breath on the blood type column. Accordingly, according to this, the Defendant could have known that he was under the influence of alcohol at the time, and that he was under the mental and physical condition to the extent that he could not understand what the meaning of the blood collection consent was, and that the Defendant withdrawn his consent before he lost his mind after signing his blood collection consent.

In light of the fact that there is no circumstance to find out, it was determined that the collection of blood to the defendant was a legitimate blood collection made in the state where the consent by the defendant's medical intention is maintained.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and the video of the CCTV screen CD in the K Hospital emergency room adopted and investigated by the court below also conforms to the above judgment.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. Regarding the unfair argument of sentencing

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2016.07.08 2015노6848

-수원지방법원 안양지원 2015.07.09 2015고정434

-서울북부지방법원 2018.02.02 2017노1395

-수원지방법원 2015.11.27 2015노4310

-서울서부지방법원 2017.08.04 2016고정1118