logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2020.12.09 2020고단3175
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On August 30, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2,00,000 by the Changwon District Court as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol level 0.194%, and around 01:00 on September 5, 2020, the Defendant driven a car with approximately KRW 100 meters DK7 car at the front of the apartment C-dong apartment C-dong parking lot in the same apartment on the roads of the G-dong apartment security room in Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Previous records as stated in the judgment on a report on drinking-driving results and a statement of circumstances of a drinking driver: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, etc.;

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. In order to eradicate social damage caused by the reasons of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, it is necessary to strictly punish a drunk driving in light of the control standards for drunk driving and the purport of the revision of the Road Traffic Act that strengthens the statutory penalty.

Although the defendant was punished for drunk driving as stated in the judgment, he re-driving without the awareness of the danger of drunk driving.

At the time of detection, according to the defendant's condition or the degree of exploitation, the defendant was taken into custody.

However, the Defendant, against the instant crime, did not repeat the crime.

Although the defendant returned home using his substitute driving, he appears to have committed the instant crime in the course of parking, and the driving distance is short.

The defendant has not been punished for any more than a fine.

The punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the sentencing conditions prescribed by Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, motive of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.

arrow