도로교통법위반(음주운전)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. In the judgment, the Defendant was punished several times for the same kind of crime, and the Defendant seems to have never shown any opening of drinking while driving a motor vehicle at all times, and there is a high possibility of criticism. At the time, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration and driving distance are also high, and the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration and driving distance are also tensions disadvantageous to the Defendant.
On the other hand, however, the fact that the defendant shows an attitude to recognize and reflect his mistake, and that some of the circumstances can be considered in the living environment of the defendant are favorable to the defendant.
In addition, considering the defendant's age, sex, environment, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the court below seems to be somewhat inappropriate.
Therefore, the defendant's argument 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, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.
[Grounds for a new judgment] Criminal facts and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, except where the "1. Police Suspect Examination Protocol against the Defendant" is deemed to be "1. The defendant's legal statement" in the summary of the evidence. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of 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 grounds for sentencing selection of imprisonment with prison labor, and the grounds for sentencing prescribed in Article 148-2(2) of the aforementioned Act, shall be determined as indicated in the order, taking into account the following factors.