logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2014.09.19 2014고단1385
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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 May 29, 2014, the Defendant driven a car with CenzE220 car with drinking alcohol at the cross-defabbag of the Hodong-gu, U.S. B apartment around the same day, and received a streetlight pole installed on the right side of the road from the first complex of mountain village to the National Bank Training Institute of Korea at around 22:26 on the same day.

The defendant, upon receiving a report, failed to comply with the request for a measurement of alcohol for three times by the end of 23:11 on the same day without justifiable grounds, on the grounds that there exist reasonable grounds to suspect that the defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as fluence by the border E belonging to the Gyeonggi Gyeonggi Police Station D District District, flusing snow and fluoring snow with heavy snow conditions, fluoring snow and smelling snow, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A copy of the usage register of drunks;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the circumstantial report on a host driver;

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 2 and Article 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the driver is deemed to have driven a motor vehicle again despite the past record of drinking driving, and further, the necessity of strict punishment is high in light of the fact that the instant crime was committed.

However, the sentence was determined in consideration of the fact that the defendant is against himself and does not repeat the crime.

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

arrow