도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.
1. The decision of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable in its summary of the grounds for appeal.
2. The judgment has a record of being punished four times due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and there are unfavorable circumstances, such as the fact that the pertinent drinking driving was caused by an accident involving pents and that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration is high.
However, the court below's sentencing is unfair in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant did not lead to a large-scale accident; (c) the Defendant disposed of the instant vehicle while the Defendant was punished in 2016 due to drinking driving; (d) the Defendant faithfully lives without any penalty power for four years after being punished; (b) the Defendant has consistently been under counseling and mental treatment for abuse of alcohol after the instant case; (c) the Defendant has been seeking to treat alcohol dependence by continuously receiving counseling and mental treatment; (d) the Defendant and his wife gave birth to a child on March 2019, which is 10 years of marriage and the Defendant responsible for his family's livelihood is long-term detention; and (e) the Defendant's age, character, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime; and (e) other circumstances such as the Defendant's age, character and behavior, motive and circumstance after the instant crime, etc., are considered to entail excessive difficulty to his dependants.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.
[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court and summary of evidence are the same as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1...