logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 고양지원 2017.09.15 2017고단1849
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On April 26, 2017, the Defendant interfered with the performance of official duties: (a) around 07:54, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the roads located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and was under the control of the Police Station C and Police Officer D while driving B vehicles while under the influence of alcohol.

As a result of a red, smelling, and drinking, the Defendant expressed the remaining alcohol ingredients in the drafting before drinking reaction and measuring drinking, and assaulted the drinking water to the face of the above D, “I would like to be provided with drinking water from D, without such need to do so,” to “I would like to do so, and I would like to see it.”

Accordingly, the defendant interfered with the legitimate execution of duties by police officers on the collection of evidence for drinking driving.

2. The Defendant was driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling and smelling on the face of the Defendant, while driving under the influence of alcohol at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) at the same time and place.

Although it is required to take a alcohol test by inserting the whole in a drinking measuring instrument due to reasonable grounds to determine a person, he/she has not complied with it, he/she has been requested to take a second-lane alcohol test at the office of the traffic accident investigation department of the Jung-gu Police Station in around 08:19 on the same day, but has not complied with it, and he/she has been requested to take a third-lane alcohol test at the same place in around 08:25 on the same day, but has not complied with it.

As a result, the defendant did not comply with a police officer's request for alcohol testing without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (related to obstructing the performance of official duties and refusing to measure drinking;

1. Relevant Article 136 of the Criminal Act and Article 136 of the Criminal Act (the point of obstructing the performance of official duties, the choice of imprisonment), Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of refusing to measure drinking, the choice of imprisonment with labor);

1. Aggravation concurrent crimes;

arrow