logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
대전지방법원 2016.03.24 2015노3467
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There is no direct evidence to prove that the Defendant was driving at the time of the instant case by mistake of fact, and the Defendant moved to the scene of the crime at the place where her f was drinking by requesting the driver to drive by proxy, and the F was driving a police officer who first called out.

In consideration of the statement, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case even though the defendant did not drive at the time of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The judgment of the court below against the defendant who was unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment below, and the court below rejected the above assertion based on the circumstances as indicated in the judgment below. The following circumstances acknowledged by these evidence, i.e., ① the Defendant’s car at the time of the instant case, 10 meters higher than 10 meters, and was parked in the same place.

M in conflict with the passenger car of M, and M in an investigative agency, “Is the Defendant and F who are sitting on the part of India at the time of the instant case,”

왜 이렇게 차를 대 놨냐

“F was seated with and did not speak at any time,” and whether the Defendant would not be able to compensate for the damages incurred.

“500,000 won,” and “Isman’s not so.”

“Around 112, the Defendant made a false statement (34-35 pages of evidence).” The Defendant took the attitude that he had driven immediately after the instant case, and the Defendant was only the Defendant in the investigative agency and the court of original instance at G’s office located on October 7, 2014, which is located after the instant case, in the investigative agency and the court of original instance.