logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2017.09.14 2017노171
위증
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles, C, at around 22:05 on the day of the crime of drinking alcohol driving in this case, started with the Defendant and her driver at a restaurant and her for approximately 1 minute, and C, at the time of drinking alcohol measurement, the police officer at the time of drinking alcohol measurement provided an opportunity to take respiratory measurements up to 3 times, and thus, the police officer is not exempted from drinking testing only 1 and 2 measurements and complied with the third measurement. Thus, the Defendant did not make a false statement contrary to memory as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (7 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant and the defense counsel at the lower court asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion as follows.

“The following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, i.e., (1) on the day when the Defendant and the driver was under influence of alcohol so that he was 2:05 p.m., C made a statement at around 22:05 p.m. on the day when the Defendant and the driver was under influence of alcohol; (2) on the day when D was under control, the time when D was requested to take a respiratory test at the time when D was under control, 2:25 p.m.; and (3) on the day when D was under control of driving of alcohol, D did not explain to the driver that the driver was under influence of alcohol so that he was given the driver the opportunity to refuse to take a drunk test from the beginning or to take a respiratory test up to three times; and (4) if D refused to take a second pulmon test and conducted a third pulmon test, it stated that at least 30 minutes of alcohol was conducted at intervals of about 10 minutes.

arrow