logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 부천지원 2017.12.13 2017고정876
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On June 15, 2017, at around 22:39, the Defendant driven Csch motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 5 meters from around the alley of Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Seo-gu to the front road of the Incheon Seo-gu Women Hospital.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D and E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to make a statement on the circumstances of a driver driving, a report on the circumstances of a driver driving, and an inquiry about the results of regulating drinking;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (2) 3 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines concerning facts constituting an offense, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination as to the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The main point of the argument is that the alcohol level of the Defendant’s blood at the actual driving time does not exceed the standard value of punishment.

2. Where the distance between the point of operation of the relevant legal doctrine and the point of measurement of the alcohol concentration in the blood is visible to increase the alcohol concentration in the blood.

Even if such circumstance alone makes it impossible to prove that the alcohol concentration at the time of actual operation exceeds the standard level of punishment.

shall not be deemed to exist.

In such a case, the punishment level was higher than the standard level at the time of driving.

Whether it can be seen or not shall be determined reasonably in accordance with logical and empirical rules, comprehensively taking into account various circumstances acknowledged by evidence, such as the distance between driving and measurement, the difference between the value of alcohol concentration and the standard value of punishment in measured blood, the hours during which drinking is continued, the volume of driver’s behavior at the time of crackdown and measurement, and the situation of the accident if there is a traffic accident, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do3360, Jun. 12, 2014).3.

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant 20:00 on June 15, 2017 and 22:00 on the same day.

arrow