(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.13 2016노5150

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) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.07.13 2016노5150

도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case premised on driving since the Defendant did not drive a CA car under the influence of alcohol. Thus, the court below erred by erroneous determination.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (the penalty amounting to five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the appellate court, the Defendant driven an automobile while under the influence of alcohol:

Since it seems that there is a considerable reason to determine the person, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is rejected.

1) According to the record of the control of the H (Evidence No. 17 of the evidence record), F’s statement (Evidence No. 9 of the evidence record), the owner of the vehicle affected by the accident, and CCTV images viewed by the appellate court, etc., the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Defendant was parked in a vehicle under the influence of alcohol and was parked in the place where the vehicle was parked.

2) The Defendant asserts that, after leaving a substitute driver, the Defendant entered the vehicle into the vehicle to turn on an excessive air condition, and that, as vehicle hand was parked in a plucked and plucked by a plucker, a car Hand used to turn on the click, operated the clicker to cut down, followed the clicker to cut down, and collision with the parked vehicle immediately thereafter, the Defendant does not drive a motor vehicle.

3) Article 2 Subparag. 26 of the Road Traffic Act provides that the term “driving” refers to the use of a horse on a road (including places other than a road in cases falling under Articles 44 and 148-2) according to its original purpose and method of use.

As seen earlier, in a case where a defendant gets on the trial operation of a vehicle and gets back the vehicle, it constitutes driving of a motor vehicle by itself, and even though the defendant has already been represented by a driver, it constitutes a driving of a motor vehicle.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.02 2016노3162

-인천지방법원 2016.06.15 2016노303

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.08.16 2018노1034

-대구지방법원 2017.02.09 2016고단3740

-수원지방법원 2017.09.22 2017노2528