logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2015.02.12 2014고단1481
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 19, 2014, at around 10:15, the Defendant driven CTpller Meba while under the influence of 0.244% of blood alcohol concentration without a motorcycle driver’s license in a section of about 500 meters from the front day of the mutual influence in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to approximately 577-80 front day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on detection of a host driver;

1. Application of the statutes on the register of driver's licenses;

1. Article 148-2 (2) 1, Article 44 (1), subparagraph 2 of Article 154, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The crime of this case committed in the state of detention, even though the period of probation is under the period of probation for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation, and the court which sentenced the above probation order, considering the fact that the defendant was subject to criminal punishment even though he was under the juvenile protective disposition, he was still a juvenile and has not yet been subject to criminal punishment, order probation and community service, and the defendant did not faithfully implement community service after the judgment on probation became final and conclusive, and does not follow the probation officer's instructions. In addition, the defendant was sentenced to the suspension of prosecution for drinking and joint assault, and was sentenced to the punishment for drinking and non-licensed driving of this case, and the director of probation office issued a detention warrant from the court. After the defendant was detained by the detention warrant, it is difficult to consider that the defendant was still under the age of 18 and applied for the cancellation of probation against the defendant, and it is more helpful to punish the defendant more than the defendant even if he was under the age of 18.

arrow