logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원통영지원 2020.08.26 2020고단430
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four 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

[criminal power] On June 2, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Changwon District Court’s Tong-gu branch.

【Criminal Facts】

On March 21, 2020, around 19:11, the Defendant, while drunk, driven a rocketing cargo vehicle in the underground parking lot for the business center B in Masung-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and was parked at the same time, caused a traffic accident that shocks the DA car.

The defendant reported 112 due to the above traffic accident and rejected a test by drinking so that he can drink, snick, walk with red, unsworn, and make a statement that the defendant had driven while under the influence of alcohol such as drinking and drinking, etc., and the defendant has considerable reasons to suspect that he was under the influence of alcohol at around 19:50 on the same day, he made the F's arms, which he had been demanded to comply with the test by drinking so-called "I am under the influence of alcohol, and do not have to do so. I am under the influence of alcohol," and he refused a test by drinking so-called "I am under the influence of alcohol" without any justifiable reason, and he stated that "I am under the influence of alcohol if I continue to refuse to do so, I am under the influence of alcohol" and "I am under the influence of drinking," and this "I am under the influence of drinking," and this "I am under the influence of drinking," and this "I am under the influence of drinking and drinking."

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) or (2) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice, and interfered with legitimate execution of duties by police officers concerning handling 112 reports.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to H and F;

1. The video CD 1.

arrow