beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On October 5, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Goyang Branch of the District Court of Jung-gu on October 5, 2012; and on November 27, 2013, the above court was sentenced to imprisonment for 8 months and suspended execution for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving).
On July 18, 2015, the Defendant, who was punished twice or more for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and was driving B rocketing car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.076% in the section of about 4km from a restaurant in which the trade name in the wall dong in Gyeyang-gu Goyang-gu, Goyang-si cannot be known, to the front day of the general household route, at around 23:13, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.076% in the section of about 4km to the front day of the general household.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and the status of drinking drivers;
1. Records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry and Acts and subordinate statutes;
1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts, and the choice of imprisonment;
1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 (see the reasons for sentencing) of the Criminal Act include the record of drunk driving as indicated in the judgment, and the defendant has already been punished three times or more or more as drunk driving, and the defendant has not been aware of the fact that the last crime of drunk driving was committed during the period of suspension of execution, and again carried out the drinking driving in this case without being aware of the fact that it is inevitable to sentence the defendant.
However, the above punishment shall be determined in consideration of the fact that the defendant repents his mistake and that the drinking water in this case was not high.