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
On June 3, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on June 3, 2008, and a fine of five million won as a fine at the Seoul Northern District Court on July 1, 2010.
On August 8, 2017, around 22:30, the Defendant driven a low alcohol vehicle with alcohol content of 0.161 percent in the 50-meter section from the 129-ro, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, to the 40-ro, Dong-ro, 500-ro, Dong-ro, the same Gu-ro, and 63-ro.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking alcohol and a statement in the circumstances of the driver of drinking alcohol;
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (Attachment to the same type 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 to mitigate small amount;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the Defendant again committed the instant crime under consideration of the circumstances that are favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that he/she had been punished for a fine twice due to drinking and driving without a license in the past, even though he/she had been punished for a license without a license in the past, and that he/she again committed the instant crime under consideration of the fact that the amount of alcohol concentration at the time of the instant crime is very high, and that the Defendant recognized the instant crime under consideration of the fact that he/she reflects the fact that the Defendant was punished beyond the past fine, that the Defendant has no record of punishment beyond the past fine,