logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.04.22 2020고단570
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 4, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Seoul Eastern District Court on June 28, 2010, a summary order of KRW 2.5 million as a fine for the same crime at the Seoul Central District Court on June 28, 2010, and a summary order of KRW 8 million as a fine for the same crime at the Suwon District Court Sungnam branch on September 4, 2013, respectively.

On December 1, 2019, at around 02:11, 201, the Defendant was making a stop on the front right part of D, which was parked at the D, while driving C rocketing car under the influence of drinking on the front side of Gangnam-gu Seoul.

At around 03:18 on the same day, the defendant continued to drive under the influence of alcohol from E restaurant in Gangnam-gu Seoul, and from F Assistant G belonging to the Seoul Western Police Station F of the Seoul Western Police Station after receiving a report, there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the defendant driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling and smelling on the face, etc., he was demanded to respond to the measurement of alcohol by inserting approximately 22 minutes in a manner of putting the breath of the breath in the b

Nevertheless, the defendant, by refusing to put the whole in a drinking measuring instrument, failed to comply with a police officer's request for a drinking test without any justifiable reason.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the requirements for alcohol measurement by driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or refusing to comply with a police officer's request for alcohol measurement without any justifiable reason at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of H;

1. Reports on the occurrence of a traffic accident and estimates;

1. Report on the state of survey, recordbook, and on-site photograph of a host driver;

1. CCTV video CDs;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation status, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a summary order;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act;

arrow