beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.08.13 2019고단2180

도로교통법위반(음주운전)

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On May 15, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and KRW 4 million as a fine at the Daejeon District Court on December 18, 2015, respectively, for the same crime.

On June 10, 2019, at around 23:25, the Defendant driven a B-to-purd motor vehicle with a alcohol level of about 0.141%, while under the influence of alcohol level of about 500 meters, from a Do from which it is impossible to find out the route of Seo-gu Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon.

As a result, the defendant was punished twice or more due to drinking driving and was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Defendant

Since there is no substantial infringement of the right of defense of the counsel, the criminal facts are revised in accordance with the purport of the legal text.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Notification of the results of the drinking-driving control, inquiry into the actual results, report on the circumstantial statement of the drinking-driving driver, circumstances report on the drinking-driving driver, control details, carving, and mandatory insurance association;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous for judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (Attachment of the preceding and summary order), and copies of the summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 148-2(1)1 and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018); the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. The crime of this case under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is deemed to have driven under the influence of alcohol not less than twice even though it had been driven under the influence of alcohol, in light of the risk and the seriousness of harm caused by alcohol driving, and the degree of alcohol level in blood alcohol, the responsibility for the crime is very large, the driving distance is not driving, the driving distance is not visible, and the traffic accident occurred frequently, and there was no criminal history exceeding the fine, and there is no clear social relationship, such as support for spouse and children.