(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.07.19 2016노983

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) 의정부지방법원 2016.07.19 2016노983

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

All the costs of the original judgment and the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles by misunderstanding the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, and found the defendant guilty on the ground that the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, i.e., the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., “A police officer who was dispatched to the site at the time informed the Defendant that he had the right to refuse voluntary accompanying, and the Defendant gave a statement to the effect that “A police officer sent to the site according to the global belt (see, e.g., No. 41, No. 42, and No. 45 of the trial record)” was stated to the effect that “A police officer who was dispatched to the site was notified that he could refuse voluntary accompanying, and the Defendant was sent to the global belt (see, e.g., 54 pages of the trial record),” and “A police officer who was dispatched the Defendant to the global belt, sent notice that he could refuse voluntary accompanying from

In light of the fact that the Defendant stated to the effect that he had the right to refuse voluntary accompanying to the Defendant once again, the Defendant was accompanied by the patrol team to the patrol team in a net order (see, e.g., the 74th page and 75th page of the trial record) that the Defendant was forced to take a drinking test while the Defendant was forced to proceed.

It is difficult to see it.

2) Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

B. Determination 1 on the unfair argument of sentencing is recognized as having a short distance from the Defendant’s drinking driving.

2) However, it is necessary to strictly punish a driver as it causes harm not only to the driver's life and body, but also causes harm to others.

유사 판례

-의정부지방법원 2017.01.10 2016노2919

-서울남부지방법원 2016.09.23 2015노1864

-대구지방법원 2018.01.25 2017노3337

-광주지방법원 2018.01.09 2017노2586

-청주지방법원 2016.08.26 2016노220