logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 김천지원 2017.07.06 2017고정135
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On January 2, 2017, the Defendant driven a DM3 vehicle under the influence of alcohol leveling to approximately 0.056% in a section of about 500 meters from the front of the C cafeteria located in Kimcheon-si B to the riverside apartment parking lot located in the same city-dong.

2. Determination

A. The presumption method of alcohol concentration among the blood in accordance with the above rare formula has parts concerning the degree of alcohol concentration among the highest blood due to the absorption and distribution of alcohol and the decomposition and extinguishment due to the lapse of time. Among them, in calculating the maximum blood concentration among the blood, it may affect the results of the absorption rate of alcohol in body and the weight of the body at a certain point after drinking, etc., and the degree of food that is in disguised at the time of drinking may vary depending on the physical nature of each individual, the kind of drinking alcohol, the degree of drinking speed, and the degree of food that is disguised. In the extinguishment of alcohol, there are various factors that may affect the blood concentration at a certain point after drinking, such as the degree of normal alcohol, body quality, drinking speed, the degree of physical activities after drinking, etc.

The conviction in a criminal trial requires proof that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. As such, in applying these impacts factors, the defendant should not be readily determined as average, and if necessary, the elements that may affect the degree of alcohol concentration in an objective and rational manner with the assistance of a person with professional knowledge or experience should be determined. If the uncertainty exists in the application of the above dmark formula and it is disadvantageous to the defendant, the calculation result has probative value to the extent that it does not give a reasonable doubt.

(2).

arrow