(영문) 창원지방법원 2017.09.14 2017노1654 | 리걸엔진

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) 창원지방법원 2017.09.14 2017노1654

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the Defendant did not provide the personal information of an acting driver, and the driving of drinking by the Defendant is recognized in full view of the following: (a) a substitute driver left the Defendant’s car (hereinafter “automobile in this case”) while leaving the vehicle in a neutral state; and (b) it is physically impossible for the Defendant to board the vehicle in his seat; and (c) it is difficult for the Defendant to believe the change of the Defendant’s seat.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

2. Determination:

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is that the Defendant driven the instant vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of 0.081% in blood alcohol level from approximately 2 km to the roads front of the Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Sungwon-si, and the roads leading to the Changwon-si, Changwon-si, which are located in the same Gu (hereinafter “instant roads”).

B. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant intentionally driven at the time of the instant case.

1) There is no direct evidence to prove that the Defendant was driving the instant vehicle to the above place at the request of the police officer called out and reported to the police by a citizen who observed that the instant vehicle was going on the top of the fleet adjacent to the bicycle lane in the Changwon-si Institute of Changwon-si, and the Defendant responded to the drinking measurement at the request of the police officer called out.

2) The instant road is a slope to the extent that a motor vehicle will be cut down if a flag was set up in a neutral zone. However, the possibility that the instant motor vehicle was set up to the summer while the Defendant was located in a neutral zone in the course of operating the cater cannot be ruled out.

3) H, a police officer in mobilization, is the lower court.

유사 판례

-대법원 2016. 11. 24. 선고 2016도12407 판결

-인천지방법원 부천지원 2016.01.21 2015고단2792

-광주지방법원 목포지원 2016.11.08 2016고단982

-수원지방법원 2019.12.18 2019나58285

-창원지방법원 2015.11.26 2015노1514