도로교통법위반(음주운전)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
On February 28, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million by the Jeonju District Court for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 2 million by the same court on November 27, 2007 for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act. < Amended by Act No. 8795, Nov. 27, 2007>
On October 29, 2016, the Defendant driven a B-hand car with approximately 30 meters alcohol concentration of about 0.116% in alcohol level on the 30-meter section from the back of the sphere station in the sphere-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Seojin-gu to the front road of the 6-lane 10 of the sphere-gu Seoul Metropolitan City.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;
1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;
1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44-2 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for an inquiry about an offense subject to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as criminal history, etc., and the selection of a sentence of imprisonment;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Act on the Suspension of Execution of Sentence 3 of the Punishment of Small Quantity Reduction Criminal Act and Article 62(1) of the community service order and Article 62-2 of the Act on the Suspension of Execution of Article 55(1)2 of the same Act, even though the Defendant had been punished twice due to a fine due to driving under drinking and a fine on one occasion due to the rejection of a measurement of drinking. In particular, the Defendant denied the initial driving of drinking by the police who was dispatched upon receiving the 112 report in relation to driving of the instant drinking, and thereby denied the Defendant’s initial driving of drinking, and thereby, caused the Defendant to conduct an additional investigation for the witness who reported the 112 report, thereby causing inconvenience for witness to undergo an additional investigation by the police, and considering various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age and occupation, and alcohol level at the time of regulating the Defendant’s age and occupation.