logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.04.26 2018고단753
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

피고인은 2018. 2. 15. 01:52 경 광주 남구 송하동에 있는 리 채 아파트 주차장에서 C 쏘렌 토 승용차의 시동을 켠 채 잠을 자고 있던 중 신고를 받고 출동한 경찰공무원의 요구에 따라 위 승용차에서 하차하였고, 위 경찰공무원은 술 냄새가 나고 얼굴에 홍조를 띠는 등 피고인이 술에 취한 상태에서 운전하였다고

Since around 02:24 on the same day, the Defendant demanded to comply with the measurement of drinking alcohol by inserting the breath of a drinking measuring instrument three times from around 02:24 to about 15 minutes on the same day, but the Defendant failed to comply with the measurement of drinking conducted by a police official without justifiable grounds, by avoiding the breath of a drinking measuring instrument by preventing it from being in a breath, making it difficult for the Defendant to do so.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Investigation report (report on the situation of the driver in charge); and

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the ledger on use of drinking meters;

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

1. The defense counsel’s assertion as to the defense counsel’s assertion under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act in the custody of the workhouse asserts to the effect that the Defendant was in a mental and physical state under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime. However, in light of the background leading to the instant crime, the method and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and there was no or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, we cannot accept the above argument.

Taking into account all the circumstances, including the fact that the defendant's mistake in sentencing is recognized, and that the defendant has no particular criminal history, in addition to a one-time fine due to drinking driving.

arrow