beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant was issued a summary order of 3,00,000 won on June 19, 2006 and 3,000,000 won on April 9, 2010 by the Gwangju District Court, and on January 24, 2013, sentenced eight months to imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Gwangju High Court on March 17, 2013, and completed the execution of the sentence by the Gwangju District Court on March 17, 2013.
On May 4, 2014, at around 18:45, the Defendant driven a Cwing III truck with the alcohol level of about 0.218% under the influence of alcohol level 0.218% while under the influence of alcohol level 0.218% at a section of about 500 meters from the front road of the Yaong-gun, Yaul-gun, Seoul, a Yaul-gun, the front road of the Yaul-gun, a Yaul-gun, a Y
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on detection of drivers and the register of driver's licenses;
1. Previous conviction in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the previous conviction of disposition, report on the result of confirmation (Attachment to a written judgment), and personal identification and confinement status;
1. Article applicable to criminal facts;
(a) Drinking: Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act;
(b) Unlicensed driving: Article 152 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the same Act.
1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition, the choice of imprisonment;
1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;
1. Although punishment has been imposed for the same kind of crime in the reason of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant again during the period of the same repeated crime and thus, it is inevitable to sentence him/her.
Provided, That the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for seven months after he/she mitigation in consideration of the fact that the defendant is a disabled person and reflects his/her depth on his/her crime.