beta
대구지방법원 2014.06.12 2014고단1906

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, at the Daegu District Court on March 5, 2009, has been sentenced to a fine of KRW 1.5 million due to a crime of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daegu District Court on December 3, 201, a fine of KRW 2 million due to a crime of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daegu District Court on December 3, 201, and a fine of KRW 1.5 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daegu District Court on January 18, 201, and was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1.5 million due to a crime of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving)

On March 14, 2014, at around 20:25, the Defendant driven C’s car within approximately 6km from the Defendant’s house located in Yongcheon-si B to the front day of the Central Motor Vehicle Research Institute located in Seocheon-si, Seocheon-si, in a state of alcohol of 0.153% of blood alcohol concentration.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the status of a drinking driver, and the written report on the status of a drinking driver;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty for a crime;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order was punished several times for drunk driving, and on October 24, 2013, the court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year and six months on November 1, 2013 due to a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.), and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on November 1, 2013, and again committed the instant crime during the suspended period of enforcement. In light of the fact that the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 1, 2013, it is necessary to punish the Defendant accordingly. However, it is necessary that the Defendant is divided in depth into the instant crime and was not repeated. The above suspended sentence is not for the same crime, but for the same kind of crime. The above suspended sentence is not for the Defendant, and all the various sentencing conditions such as the motive, means and result of the instant crime, the following circumstances