logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.10.28 2020고단8265
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 May 2, 2016, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Incheon District Court as a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On August 19, 2020, the Defendant driven E QM5 vehicles under the influence of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.108% in the 2km section from the roads near C in Silung-si B to the front roads D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Criminal history records, reply reports, investigation reports (Attachment of a summary order), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the summary order;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Addenda to the Road Traffic Act (Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 2020), Article 148-2 (1) and Article 44 (1) of the former Road Traffic Act (wholly amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 2020), the choice of imprisonment for a crime

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

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. One year and two years and six months of imprisonment within the scope of punishment by law; and

2. The sentencing criteria are not set according to the sentencing criteria. 3. The sentencing criteria are not set according to the sentencing criteria. The sentencing criteria in this case, including the numerical value of blood alcohol concentration in the judgment of the sentence on March 3, 200, the section of drunk driving, the circumstances leading to drinking driving, etc., shall be determined as the order, comprehensively taking into account all the arguments in this case and the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, including the circumstances after

arrow