logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2013.08.22 2012고단6617
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 30, 2007, the defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Gwangju District Court on March 30, 2007, and on December 8, 2011, the Gwangju District Court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for five months.

On November 21, 2012, at around 22:33, the Defendant driven a C EFstststun car on the road front of the Gwangju Mine-gu Mari-dong “Maridong,” while under the influence of alcohol with 0.15% alcohol concentration.

2013 Highest 2938

1. Around 21:30 on April 17, 2013, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (unauthorized Driving) and the Road Traffic Act (Free Driver’s License) driven a CFststy drive car without a driver’s license, and proceeded at about 40 km in speed from the direction of black tin distance to the erospym distance along the erosption distance.

At the same time, the victim D(the age of 47) driving E 125cc is proceeding in front of the defendant's moving direction, and the driver's negligence of driving the victim while neglecting his duty of care to maintain a sufficient distance from the above Orala while neglecting to pass safely, caused damage to the left side of the victim's Orala while passing over to the left side of the right side of the victim's Orala, which caused damage to the right side of the victim's vehicle and immediately stopping the vehicle without taking necessary measures.

3. The Defendant violated the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective injury with a deadly weapon, etc.) stopped a vehicle from the celebling distance located in the valley-dong of Gwangju Mine-gu, Gwangju, about 300 meters away from the site of the accident while the Defendant was provokinged the victim's ozone and escaped.

The defendant tried to see that "the victim who was scamed by the defendant was scam or was reported to the police because of why she would escape," and again, the victim left side of the victim who left the vehicle by driving the vehicle again to prevent the front of the defendant vehicle.

arrow