logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2019.11.29 2019고단1925
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On August 29, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 4 million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Jeju District Court, and on April 29, 2015, to a fine of 6 months and a suspended sentence of 2 years for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Jeju District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

At around 02:20 on July 7, 2019, the Defendant driven C Poter Cargo Vehicles with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.169% under the influence of alcohol at approximately 10 meters in the 10-meter parking lot B.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol, was driving a motor vehicle again under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each written statement of D and E;

1. The circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, investigation report (report on the circumstances of a drinking driver), notification of the results of crackdown on drinking driving, and inquiry report on the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, etc., inquiry reports, investigation reports (Attachment to the same type of crime), and application of two copies of judgment;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Code for discretionary mitigation has a record of having been punished several times for the same kind of crime, and among them, the crime of this case was committed again despite the record of having been punished as a suspended sentence of imprisonment.

In light of the fact that the defendant's awareness of drinking driving seems to be significantly lacking, and that there is a social consensus that strong punishment for drinking driving is necessary due to measures against high risk of recidivism of drinking drivers and the seriousness of traffic accident damage caused by drinking driving, it is inevitable to punish the defendant strictly.

However, considering the favorable circumstances that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, method, and consequence, etc.

arrow