beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
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 4, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 from the Seoul Western District Court to a fine of KRW 700,000 for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and a fine of KRW 3.5 million for the same crime at the Seoul Southern District Court on October 31, 201.
around 14:31 on January 24, 2015, the Defendant driven a D-wing truck under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 3 km from the front of a restaurant in the trade name non-fluence Dong-si, Yongsan-gu, Busan-si to the front of the Dong-gu, Pari-si, Pari-si, Pari-si, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.121%.
Accordingly, even though the Defendant violated the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice, the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. The circumstantial report on a drinking driver and the results of the control of drinking driving;
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. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see the following reasons for sentencing):
1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see the following reasons for sentencing)
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant had already been punished twice due to drinking driving, and again, the possibility of criticism exists in light of the fact that the defendant had already been punished twice, but the defendant is not sentenced to imprisonment and the execution of imprisonment is suspended as above, considering the fact that the defendant is breaking his mistake in depth, there is no record of more severe punishment than a fine, and there is a family member to support.