(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.12.21 2018노2221 | 리걸엔진

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 2018.12.21 2018노2221

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles 1) The Defendant’s act was inevitably driven the instant vehicle to control the accident, and thus, the Defendant’s act constitutes an emergency escape and thus, illegality is denied (the grounds for appeal submitted by the Defendant on July 9, 2018, using the expression “political defense” as the grounds for appeal, but considering the overall contents of the appeal, the assertion in the trial process of the first instance trial, and the reasons for appeal submitted by the defense counsel in the first instance trial, it appears that the Defendant asserts “emergency escape”. 2) 0.120% of the alcohol concentration among the blood of this case related to alcohol concentration among the blood of this case, on the premise that the Defendant’s final drinking time was at around 01:0, Jan. 17, 2018, applying the above drone model on the premise that the Defendant’s final drinking time was at around 01:0, and even if the Defendant’s measurement and collection was conducted without reflecting the clean dust contained in the mouth.

The alcohol concentration of the defendant's blood does not constitute 0.1% or more.

3) Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Whether there is a misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles or not, the Defendant had the same assertion as the grounds for appeal in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the said assertion by stating in detail the arguments and the judgment in the item “1. Emergency Escape Judgment”.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged by the defendant.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

2) The lower court and the appellate court in relation to the alcohol concentration in blood.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 2017.06.08 2016노2987

-대전지방법원 2017.05.18 2016노3476

-춘천지방법원 2017.06.07 2015노1348

-전주지방법원 2018.05.30 2017노1849

-대전지방법원 2017.06.21 2016노2189