(영문) 대구지방법원 포항지원 2017.03.29 2016고정580

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대구지방법원 포항지원 2017.03.29 2016고정580

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 12, 2016, around 04:28, the Defendant driven approximately 1 kilometer to the front road of the e hospital on the two-distance death road in the north-gu at the port in the state of drinking alcohol concentration of 0.110% in blood. The gist of the evidence is that the Defendant driven approximately 1 kilometer to the front road of the e hospital on the two-distance death road at the port.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The Defendant asserts that the numerical statement report on the situation of a driver driving, inquiry of the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and notification of the results of the crackdown on drinking driving [the Defendant did not go through her marse marse rine at the time of the measurement

On the other hand, the defendant's notification of the results of the influence on drinking driving and the results of the control of drinking driving, which he signed after the measurement of drinking, are indicated as her her mar mar rin. According to this, it seems that there was a her her mar mar rin.

Unlike the description on the above documents, it was not found that a marse measure was not taken when a drinking measurement for the actual defendant.

However, at least 48 minutes from the time of the last drinking on the day of the case by the defendant (at an investigative agency, until 3:40 on the day by the defendant, and at this time until 02:00 on this court.

Among them, drinking was measured after the lapse of the volume of the statement made by the investigative agency, which is favorable to the defendant, and it was 20 minutes after the time required for the remaining alcohol in the mouth proposed in the traffic control guidelines, and the defendant seems to have not used similar alcohol such as the oral clean system after drinking. In light of the above, it is not deemed that the drafting her her sensium had a significant impact on the Defendant's drinking value.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion cannot be accepted.

Application of Statutes

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

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act (the first offender), 53, and 55(1).

참조조문

-형법 제53조

-형법 제55조 제1항 제6호

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2018.07.10 2018고정183

-전주지방법원 2017.01.12 2016노1369

-수원지방법원 2016.04.06 2015노5163

-서울남부지방법원 2018.02.02 2017고정1641

-서울동부지방법원 2017.02.09 2016노1354