logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 통영지원 2018.04.13 2018고단152
도로교통법위반(음주측정거부)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On January 5, 2018, Defendant 152 driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol at the entrance distance of Madong agro-industrial complex located at the 376-57, the head of the Sindong-gun, Gyeongdong-gun, Gyeongdong-gun, the 2018 upper end of which was under the influence of alcohol on January 5, 2018, while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol at the expense of the front vehicle, and temporarily stopped at the time with the front vehicle, Defendant 12 was under the influence of alcohol, such as drinking in the Defendant’s entrance from E from the slope belonging to the D police box of the Sungsung-gun Police Station, which was called upon 112 report, making a smell in the Defendant’s entrance, ga

인 정할 만한 상당한 이유가 있어 같은 날 23:10 경부터 23:37 경까지 약 27분 동안 4회에 걸쳐 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 방법으로 음주 측정에 응할 것을 수회 요구 받았음에도 불구하고 음주측정기에 입김을 불어넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정요구에 응하지 아니하였다.

2. On June 4, 2012, Defendant 277 issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Changwon District Court’s Tong-gu District Court’s Tong-gu branch on June 4, 2012, and on November 17, 2016, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 2,00,00 as a fine for the same crime.

On December 27, 2017, around 23:48, the Defendant driven a Ctdon car with approximately 500 meters alcohol concentration of 0.147% in blood alcohol level from the street in front of trade in the Dong-dong, Mapo-dong, Changpo-gu, Changpo-si, Changpo-si to the front coast of the Dong-dong apartment in the same Dong-dong, Mapo-dong, Mapo-dong to the 500-dong Mapo-dong.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice, driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

[2018 Highest 152]

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on detection of a driver at the main place of business, a report on the circumstances of the driver at the main place of business, an investigation report, and a photograph refusing to measure alcohol;

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A response to a request for appraisal, a written alcohol appraisal, and a report on the detection of a driver with primary alcohol during blood;

1. A previous conviction: A written inquiry, such as criminal history, shall be made;

arrow