Last news in Fakti

The NRA Inspectorate is deaf, blind and mute about the violations of the drunken attacker from Haskovo

500 leva fine for the employee of the NRA revenue agency, caught driving a company car under the influence

Apr 9, 2025 14:00 105

A final verdict, which is not subject to appeal and protest, was given to an employee of the NRA “Fiscal Control”, who was caught driving a company car after consuming alcohol, marica.bg reported.

A 500 leva fine, deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle for 6 months, and the withdrawal of 8 checkpoints is the punishment for D.S. Marica.bg reported on the case after it was reported by employees worried about the fact that their sanctioned colleague was driving them to their workplaces at the border.

The company Renault Traffic with driver D.S. was stopped for inspection on August 20, 2023, and the breathalyzer read 0.77 per mille. The driver received a penalty notice, and on October 21, 2024, the decision of the Haskovo District Court came, imposing a penalty of 500 leva in fines, the withdrawal of 8 points and the license. The Administrative Court confirmed this penalty with decision No. 1280 of February 14 of this year. It is final and subject to appeal.

It is clear from the materials in the case that the driver did not object to the findings, did not give a blood sample, and in practice agreed with the breathalyzer's testimony. In addition, he did not deny the use of alcohol to the control body. The act was committed culpably, with direct intent, since the person was aware of its socially dangerous nature, knew that he should not drive a vehicle after drinking alcohol, but nevertheless did it, which is assumed that he intended to cause socially dangerous consequences, it also says there.

As we wrote, D. S.'s license was returned a long time ago, since the 6 months had expired. When we reported on the case about a year ago, the NRA commented that they were waiting for the “final decision of the court in order to take the necessary legal measures, if the judicial act requires this”.