도로교통법위반(음주운전)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
On June 30, 2008, the Defendant received the summary order of KRW 700,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Jung-gu District Court on June 30, 2008, and the summary order of KRW 500,000 as a fine in the same court on September 22, 2008.
On July 10, 2020, the Defendant driven a Fpoter cargo vehicle under the influence of alcohol with about 0.102% of alcohol level 0.102% in the section of about 1km from the alcohol cluster in front of the trade name, “C,” “C,” located in D at the same time, to the front road in D.
Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Statement on the circumstances of a drinking driver, statement on the results of crackdown on drinking driving, and appraisal report on detection of a drinking driver;
1. Records of driving under the influence of judgment: Application of criminal records, etc. and investigation reports (verification of records of driving under the influence of sound driving) Acts and subordinate statutes;
1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. The Road Traffic Act amended on December 24, 2018, as of December 24, 2018, upon the demand that the punishment for the latest drunk driving should be strengthened for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, has strengthened the punishment to be imposed by imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years but not more than five years (one year and not more than two years, even if discretionary mitigation is conducted).
Although the Defendant had already been punished twice due to drinking driving, and again, he was driving under the influence of this case, the responsibility for such crime is not less severe.
However, the punishment shall be determined to suspend the execution of imprisonment after discretionary mitigation in consideration of the fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized, and that the above drinking driving force in 2008 has passed.