logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.09.24 2015고단4862
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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

[criminal power] On March 22, 2011, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million at the Incheon District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act and a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving). On November 28, 2014, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 5 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On June 17, 2015, the Defendant, who violated the Road Traffic Act (driving) and the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) had driven two or more times, again, driven a vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.125% without obtaining a driver’s license at the section of about 1 Km from the front and rear door of the Yongsan-gu Incheon Metropolitan City on June 17, 2015 to the front and rear door of the Yongsan-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, and driving the vehicle.

2. On June 18, 2015, the Defendant violated the Resident Registration Act: (a) did not possess a person who was requested to present an identification card in order to verify his/her identity on the front of 236 roads of the Incheon Southern Police Station, which was investigating a traffic accident; (b) did not use the Defendant’s resident registration number as his/her employee, as if he/she were his/her resident registration number; and (c) did not use another person’s resident registration number as his/her own resident registration number.

3. The Defendant forged a private document and uttering of a falsified document, without authority, signed D’s signature in the column for the driver’s signature of the Main Drivers’ circumstantial statement report and the Main Drivers’ Detection report in the name of D without authority for the purpose of utteringing the completion of the document at the time and place specified in paragraph (2) as D, and exercised the document by presenting it to Gyeong, who knew of the fact that the document was actually established on that spot, as the document was actually established.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A report on the statement of the status of an employer, a written report on the status of an employer, and a written report on the employee;

arrow