Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On July 13, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment by the Gwangju District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act ( sound driving), and on June 24, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of seven million won by the Gwangju District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Gwangju District Court on June 24, 201, and was in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.
At around 16:30 on July 3, 2013, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.132%, driven the Da (K) 5 car in the section of about 20 km from the parking lot, around 16:59 on the same day, to the front road of the public restaurant in 572-37, the Haak-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Seoul, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor around 16:59 on the same day.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on the circumstances of an employee;
1. Records before judgment: Application of inquiry reports and investigation reports, including criminal records, and Acts and subordinate statutes;
1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. is that the defendant driven a motor vehicle in a considerable drinking level of 0.132% of blood alcohol level, the defendant repeated the crime of this case even though he had been punished twice or twice by fine due to the crime of drinking driving like the crime of this case, which is the same kind as the crime of this case, and the defendant repeated the crime of this case, and the defendant refused the inspection by the police officer who ordered a stop even after driving under the influence of alcohol, and even though the police is stiffed by driving the motor vehicle, etc., the defendant should be punished with strict punishment against the defendant.
However, the defendant is often divided and reflects his mistake, and the defendant is sentenced to a penalty of the same kind in the previous conviction.