logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.01.12 2016노556
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the emergency escape defendant was driving a vehicle as stated in the facts charged of this case, it is inevitable to drive a short distance from the parking lot near the place where the defendant was placed on the road while driving the vehicle, and to prevent traffic interference and accidents.

Therefore, although the defendant's act constitutes an emergency escape under Article 22 (1) of the Criminal Act, and thus the illegality should be removed, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on emergency escape, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 2,00,000) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The Defendant asserted the same purport at the lower court’s judgment as to the allegation of emergency evacuation. The lower court held that ① the road in which the Defendant driven the instant restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) was a one-lane road in front of the instant restaurant, and there is a protection zone for children immediately before the instant restaurant, the protection zone for children is terminated, and there is a small distance in front of the instant restaurant. ② The instant road is not a road driving in high speed, but a vehicle driving in high speed, but a vehicle driving in the vicinity of the instant restaurant; ② the road is not a road driving in front of the instant restaurant, but a vehicle driving in front of the instant restaurant; ③ the vehicle driving in front of the instant restaurant is a vehicle driving in the instant restaurant, and the vehicle driving in front of the instant restaurant is a vehicle driving in front of the instant restaurant; ③ the substitute driver entered the instant restaurant and returned the vehicle to himself/herself after the Defendant was aware of the defect in the direction of the instant vehicle driving in the instant restaurant.

arrow