도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, 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
1. Around August 28, 2018, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (driving on a sound driving) and driven a CWD car in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.274% from the 4km section of approximately 4km to the 26rd-water terminal parking lot in the city of Incheon Reinforcement-gun from the street in front of Incheon Reinforcement-gun to the 26rd-water terminal parking lot in the city of Incheon Reinforcement-gun.
2. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act is a holder of Cratoon car.
No owner of an automobile shall operate an automobile which is not covered by mandatory insurance.
Nevertheless, the Defendant operated the car without mandatory insurance at the time and place specified in Paragraph 1.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;
1. Notification of the results of drinking control;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on mandatory insurance;
1. Relevant Act on the facts constituting an offense: Articles 148-2 (2) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 46 (2) 2 and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;
1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Provide community service and attend lectures is a case where the defendant drives a vehicle not covered by mandatory insurance under the influence of alcohol content of 0.274%, and the defendant has a record of being fined once for the same kind of crime even before.
However, the fact that the defendant acknowledges the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that is not causing a traffic accident involving human and material damage while driving under drinking, that is not good in the state of health due to warning, etc., and that it is hard to repeat the same mistake again, and the age, character, environment, and environment of the defendant.