logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.11.27 2014고단4837
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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

1. On August 22, 2014, at around 10:30, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of measurement) caused a traffic accident involving E-F-to-purd vehicle that was parked while driving a D rocketing car while under the influence of alcohol at around 10:30, 2014.

Therefore, there is a reasonable ground to recognize that the Defendant was driven while under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling, smelling, reding, etc., from the superintendent of the G District in the G District of the G District of the G District of the G District of the G District of the G District of the G District of Lguldong, in response to the report of E, he/she was demanded to comply with the measurement of alcohol by inserting three times in the Defendant’s residence in the above CFa B 401, around 11:43, around 11:56 and around 12:14.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, who had a drinking-free measuring instrument, did not comply with a police officer’s request for sobreath alcohol measurement without justifiable grounds by avoiding the police officer’s breaths by breathing the police officer’s hand and taking the breaths.

2. On August 22, 2014, the Defendant was demanded from police officers H to state his/her opinion in the driver’s statement column of the situation report on the driver’s statement of the driver’s identity as the police officers’ failure to comply with a police officer’s request for alcohol measurement as set forth in Article 401(1) and (2) of the above CB 401.

Therefore, while the Defendant received the report from the Defendant and entered it in his own pen, the said report on the circumstances of the drinking driver was left on the floor after tearing the tear without any reason under the influence of alcohol.

Accordingly, the defendant, who is a document used by public offices, damaged the validity of the report by damaging one copy of the circumstantial statement.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement to I;

1. A written confirmation of a person who refuses to take a drinking test;

1. Investigation report (information of public documents) and report on the status of the driver, the driver, the auditor, and his statement (investigative records No. 50 pages);

1. The investigation report (as to the attachment of photographs);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on site photographs at the time of accident;

1. Criminal facts;

arrow