beta
Text
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On December 3, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Suwon District Court’s Eunpyeong Site on December 3, 2010, and on January 28, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for the same crime, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court.
At around 02:00 on December 30, 2019, the Defendant driven a rocketing car with approximately KRW 600m alcohol concentration of 0.113% while under the influence of alcohol, from the street above the B apartment in Yangju to the C apartment in Yangju City.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on detection of, and report on, the driver's identity and statement of the driver, and on-site photographs;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, etc. inquiry reports (A);
1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;
1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period from one year to two years and six months;
2. No sentencing criteria shall be set;
3. Since the Defendant was sentenced to punishment for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act around 2010 and around 2015, considering the distance from the previous penal records and the degree of alcohol content in the blood of this case is 0.113%, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive and means of a crime, circumstances after a crime, etc., the sentence shall be determined as ordered by comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the following: