logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2018.05.18 2017고단2421
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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

On July 28, 2015, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 3 million from the Jeju District Court on July 28, 2015 due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and a fine of KRW 5 million from the same court on March 30, 2016 due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

[2] On August 11, 2017, at around 15:30, the Defendant driven Cschnton car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.134% in the 5km section from the middle school affiliated with the Jeju University University College of Education to the roads adjacent to the 20km Doriro, Jeju.

"2018 Highest 78"

1. On December 24, 2017, the Defendant: (a) on December 24, 2017, the Defendant: (b) by deceiving the victim as if he did not have the intent or ability to pay the taxi expenses even though he did not have any money under the process of paying the taxi expenses; (c) had the victim move the taxi to the Han-gu Forest post office located in the Han-si, Jeju National University; and (d) did not pay 24,000 won for the taxi expenses; and (d) had the victim move the taxi to the Han-si, Han-si, Jeju National University; and (e) obtained financial benefits equivalent to the same amount by failing to pay the taxi expenses.

2. On December 24, 2017, the Defendant: (a) found the unpaid taxi-free case as indicated in paragraph (1) around 21:13; (b) found it together with D, a taxi driver; and (c) took the facing box of the Party E in Jeju, the Defendant: (a) took the face of G at one time, who was asked by G, who was asked by the police officer affiliated with the police box, of personal information; and (d) took the face of G at one time, and obstructed the police officer’s legitimate performance of duties concerning the criminal investigation.

Summary of Evidence

"2017 Highest 2421"

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Fact-finding reports on drivers of drinking alcohol and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking alcohol;

1. A previous conviction in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and a summary order "2018 Highest 78";

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Application of the taxi expense receipt statute 1.

arrow