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
【The Defendant issued, on December 20, 2002, a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Incheon District Court’s Vice-Support on December 20, 2002, a summary order of KRW 1 million for the same crime from the same support on December 2, 2010, and a summary order of KRW 4 million for the same crime from the same support on September 6, 2012, respectively.
【Criminal facts” around September 17, 2017, the Defendant driven a B rocketing car under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.151%, while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.151% from the front of the king-dong, Seo-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City to the road front of the Kimpo-dong Enterprise Bank.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking and a statement in the circumstances of the driver of drinking;
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment to the previous and summary order);
1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;
1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act include: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime at the same time despite the fact that the Defendant had been subject to three times or more due to drinking alcohol driving; and (b) the degree of alcohol alcohol level from blood transfusion reaches 0.151%; (c) the Defendant’s confession and confession reflects his mistake; and (d) the Defendant’s person’s wife wanting to take the Defendant’s wife, taking into account the favorable circumstances, and setting the same sentence as the order, taking into account various sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant argument.