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 two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
[criminal history] On April 1, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 7 million for a crime of violating road traffic law (driving alcohol) at the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court). On July 24, 2012, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime at the Jung-gu District Court (Seoul District Court). On January 29, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a fine for the same crime.
[2] On December 20, 2017, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol level of 0.068% from the blood transfusion around 23:08, the Defendant driven a Bland car over about 4 km from the Do near the Yangyang-dong, Seocho-gu, Seoul, to the road front of the Koyang-dong, a national bank, a bank of the Republic of Korea located in the Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Report on the circumstances of a driver who is placed in driving and notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (verification of the same kind of force);
1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;
1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (the following sentencing shall be considered in light of the circumstances favorable to the attention) of the mitigated amount;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following sentencing shall be considered as favorable to the Supreme Court);
1. The sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures is due to - unfavorable circumstances: The fact that a previous conviction of a fine of the same kind and a previous offense of the instant case has been committed at the same time despite the name three times, such as the first head of the ruling; favorable circumstances: the defendant commits a mistake; the defendant is not guilty of a fine exceeding the fine; other circumstances: the defendant's age, sex, occupation, family relation