logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2020.06.19 2020노301
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment of the court below (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

At the time of the instant case, the Defendant: (a) placed the Defendant’s vehicle on the one-way plate at the end of the fee, and sent another substitute engineer at the time of the instant case; (b) the Defendant’s failure to accurately know the Defendant’s location; (c) led to the instant crime in order to prevent the traffic accident inevitably; and (d) to meet other substitute engineers sent out, the Defendant examined ex officio as to whether the instant crime constitutes an emergency evacuation and thus, the illegality is dismissed.

The court below acknowledged the following facts and circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., ① the defendant stated at the time of the prosecutor's investigation that "the first representative director's telephone number is at the risk of gathering. The defendant does not have a telephone number for the first representative engineer, so that staff in Mongolia makes a direct call at low time (Evidence No. 86) and does not submit objective data on the existence of the first representative engineer up to the trial, ② the defendant appears to have sent the representative engineer "H" at the time of this case (Evidence No. 10), but in light of its statements, the "H" appears not to be the first representative engineer at the time of this case, but the second representative engineer at the time of the defendant's assertion, ③ the defendant actually sent the first representative engineer at the time, but it is difficult to find any danger and obstacle to traffic by leaving the defendant's vehicle on one side, and thus, it cannot be viewed as an emergency evacuation of the defendant.

Judgment

Although the defendant had been punished several times for the violation of the Road Traffic Act, he/she does not obtain the driver's license during the period of the same repeated crime.

arrow