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 of the final judgment.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On November 25, 2009, the Defendant, at the Seoul Central District Court, issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on November 4, 201, at the Incheon District Court, issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. On November 4, 201, the Defendant was a person who had the record of being issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. On November 4, 2013, the Defendant driven a B string car under the influence of alcohol concentration of approximately 100 meters from the Do before the “line Lane,” located in the Do of the Namyang-si, Namyang-do, Namyang-si, Namyang-do, to the 290-5 front day of the same Ri.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. A written report from an employee of an employer;
1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, investigation reports, 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. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation ( normal consideration in favor of the defendant among the grounds for discretionary mitigation);
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (including repeated consideration of the reasons for both punishment, which are favorable to the defendant);
1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. is that the defendant, with the reason for sentencing, has a history of punishment for drunk driving, has a history of committing the crime in the past, and the degree of alcohol content in the blood alcohol of this case reaches the state of inflow. However, it is difficult to strictly punish the defendant, considering the fact that the defendant is led to confession and not repeating, and the crime of the above escape vehicle is around 200, the defendant is sentenced to the same sentence as the order to give the defendant an opportunity for last opening for the same kind of crime.