도로교통법위반(음주운전)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
except that 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 May 30, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Suwon District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act. On November 1, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Daegu District Court.
On May 2, 2020, at around 01:45, the Defendant driven a D-solided car with a blood alcohol content of about 0.115% while under the influence of alcohol from around 200 meters to the front parking lot of the above apartment C-dong.
Accordingly, the defendant was driving under drinking not less than twice.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on the occurrence of a traffic accident, report on the actual condition, report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, report on the results of the control of drinking driving, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation status;
1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant, while having been punished twice as a fine for the same kind of crime, was also under the influence of driving under the influence of alcohol.
However, the sentencing conditions indicated in the arguments of this case such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, means and result of the crime of this case shall be determined in consideration of the fact that the defendant led to his confession of the crime of this case and his mistake is divided, that there was no record of punishment exceeding the fine after around 2010, and that there was no record of punishment exceeding the fine, and that there was no other reason.