도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.
2. However, the defendant recognized and reflected the crime.
The distance of the defendant's driving in a drinking state is not long.
As such, there is a strong circumstance to be considered favorable to the Defendant. However, even though the Defendant had been punished several times due to the same kind of crime, the Defendant again committed the instant crime. The Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration is very high to 0.226%.
As such, there is a person who is disadvantageous to the defendant.
In addition, in full view of all other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and method of committing the crime, and circumstances after committing the crime, the sentence of the lower court cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too large. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
3. According to the conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 148-2(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act in the application of the law of the court below is obvious that the “Article 148-2(2)1 of the Road Traffic Act” is a clerical error in the “Article 148-2(2)1 of the Road Traffic Act,” and thus, it shall be corrected pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on the Criminal Procedure.