logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2018.08.31 2018노1167
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, misunderstanding of the facts, she drank 3 residues after having returned home after driving of the instant case. As such, the Defendant did not have driven while under the influence of alcohol concentration as stated in the facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous by mistake of facts.

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

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, it is recognized that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol while under the influence of alcohol 0.098% as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

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

① The Defendant, after drinking alcohol on the preceding day of the instant case, returned home at night 12:0 a.m., found a vehicle set up in a restaurant on the A.m. on the day and left the scene without taking any measures to collision with the vehicle parked in a cafeteria parking lot. On the report of the owner of the damaged vehicle F at the time, the police officer was subject to the investigation while called the Rab.

② Police officers, who were dispatched to the scene, confirmed the collision of the damaged vehicle by the Defendant through CCTV in the parking lot, and confirmed the Defendant’s smell while investigating the circumstances of the accident by leaving the parking lot, and requested the Defendant to take a alcohol test.

Accordingly, the Defendant argued that “I have drinking alcohol at night, and I have no other fact of drinking today,” and rejected on-site measurement of drinking alcohol.

Police officers conducted a alcohol measurement by voluntarily accompanying the Defendant to the district, and as a result of the measurement of alcohol alcohol, 0.098% of alcohol level in blood was measured as stated in the instant indictment.

(3) The procedure for measuring alcohol to the defendant at the time was lawful, and the defendant's blood concentration was measured.

arrow