logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 홍성지원 2020.06.09 2020고단181
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by a fine of KRW 10 million.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 23, 2012, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 7 million from Daejeon District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of measurement).

The Defendant, at around 05:18 on 29, 2020, reduced and recognized the blood alcohol concentration in the 1km section from the frontway to D intersection B around approximately 1km, on the grounds as examined below, on the grounds that the blood alcohol concentration is below 0.093%.

In the state of the influence of alcohol, the E SP has driven a car in the E SP area.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous conviction in the judgment: Criminal history records, the relevant summary order [it is difficult to view that the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant at the time of driving is 0.121%, without reasonable doubt, in light of various circumstances, such as the fact that the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant at the time of driving is 0.093%, which is measured by the method near the time of driving, blood was collected after a considerable time has elapsed since the defendant driven the defendant, and that there is a possibility that blood was increased since the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant was absorption into his body until the time of collecting blood; and that the defendant's blood alcohol concentration was 0.121%; however, it is difficult to view that the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant at the time of driving is 0.093% higher, which is recognized as 0.093% higher

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is high to eradicate the driving of drinking alcohol.

Defendant was punished twice for a similar crime in the past, and committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution for another crime.

However, the defendant is currently hospitalized and treated as a mental disease, such as stimulative disorder, and the crime of this case was also affected by the crime of this case.

Defendant currently reflects on crimes.

arrow