logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.09.14 2017고단2878
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On May 8, 2017, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol on the front side of D in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, while driving a motor vehicle with 125 wheels of alcohol on the front side of D, while drinking, G details belonging to the F District Unit of the Seoul Sejong Cancer Police Station, police officers, and the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle with 125 wheels of alcohol, he/she driven the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol by drinking alcohol to the Defendant, such as smelling alcohol, making a redlight, etc.

Due to reasonable grounds, there was a demand for responding to the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately 10 minutes into a drinking measuring instrument.

Nevertheless, the defendant sees "hing to drive by Scar."

C. The expression “Epronia” was expressed, and it did not comply with a police officer’s request for alcohol testing without good cause.

2. The Defendant, upon receiving a report from 112, who was suspected of driving alcohol at the time and at the place specified in the above Paragraph 1., committed assault, such as: (a) 100 meters away from the police station; (b) 100 meters away from the place; (c) Had the police officer G, who was frighted to take a bath; (d) Had the Had the chest of the police officer Had the Defendant at once and 3 times; and (c) Had the Defendant’s chest Had the Defendant’s head of the defect in order to arrest the Defendant in a flagrant offender under suspicion of interference with the performance of official duties.

In this regard, the defendant interfered with the handling of the 112 reported case by police officers and legitimate execution of duties concerning the arrest of flagrant offenders.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with H;

1. A statement of control over the I's refusal to measure drinking;

1. Notification of the result of drinking control measurement;

1. A written statement of the driver who takes charge;

1. Statement of control over refusal of drinking alcohol measurement;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to shooting CDs upon commission of crimes;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (1) 2 and 44 (2) of the same Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, the selection of imprisonment for a crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3.

arrow