logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 충주지원 2014.06.18 2013고정301
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

around 03:13 on September 20, 2013, the Defendant driven a BYa car with approximately 1km section from the front of the training-dong office in Chungcheong-si to the front of the training-dong office in Chungcheongnam-si to the front of the school of the Sejong-do, Chungcheongnam-do, with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.139%.

The defendant of "2013 High 302" is a teacher of a school in C's mutual name.

On September 20, 2013, at around 03:25, the Defendant was investigated from the D District District District of the Chungcheong Police Station D, which was located in the Chungcheong Police Station, due to the suspicion of drunk driving.

The Defendant, on the ground that he was under the influence of drunk driving from the above E, was influence and, on the ground that he was under the influence of drunk driving, received the D District Unit, received it, and assaulted his handphone to the above E, and interfered with the legitimate performance of duties by police officers concerning the crackdown on drinking driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of each police statement to F and E;

1. Statement statement and report on detection of a host driver;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs and photographs related to the performance of official duties;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Article 136 (1) of the Criminal Act, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, and the choice of fines for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 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 of the provisional payment order is that the crime of this case committed against a police officer who driven while under the influence of alcohol and performed official duties is not less than that of the crime, and the defendant, even though he had the record of punishment for the crime of drinking driving in the past, is once again charged with the crime of this case, the responsibility of the defendant is heavier in light of the fact that he

However, the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime.

arrow