도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) by the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, etc., which has high blood alcohol concentration at the time of his/her drunk driving, the Defendant was punished several times for the same kind of crime and thereby commits the instant crime, the Defendant’s crime of this case shall be subject to criticism.
However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.
【Reason used in multi-level] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court and summary of the facts constituting the crime and summary of evidence are as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 148-2(1)1 and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018); the choice of imprisonment for a crime;
1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;
1. Determination of the sentence as ordered by comprehensively taking account of the various sentencing conditions as seen earlier prior to the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 (C) of the Criminal Act (i.e., discretionary mitigation).