logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2016.07.18 2016고단844
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On October 22, 2010, the Defendant is a person who violated a summary order of KRW 2.5 million by a fine for a violation of Road Traffic Act at the Gwangju District Court on the grounds of a violation of Road Traffic Act, and on January 7, 2011, by issuing a summary order of KRW 4 million by a fine for a violation of Road Traffic Act at the same court on the grounds of a violation of Road Traffic Act at least twice.

[Criminal facts] The Defendant driven B Poter cargo in the state of under the influence of alcohol 0.257% from a section of about 100 meters in blood alcohol level to a third square in the same Dong, from around April 22, 2016 to the 3rd square in the same Dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver;

1. Request for appraisal, request for appraisal of alcohol concentration in blood, and response to a request for appraisal;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: References to inquiries, such as criminal history, attachment of a summary order, and application of two Acts and subordinate statutes in duplicate;

1. Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, the selection of a fine, and the selection of a fine;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, committed the instant crime in spite of the fact that the Defendant had been issued two times due to drinking driving prior to the instant crime, and in light of the fact that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration in the blood at the time of the instant crime is very high, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant led to the crime of this case and repented his mistake, the defendant did not drive immediately after drinking, but was found to have been driven by drinking while driving in order to make a boom in the situation where the drinking was less than the previous night, the distance of driving of the defendant is short, the defendant did not have any other record of crime except the record of fine twice due to driving of the above drinking, the two sentences in similar cases, and others of the defendant.

arrow