logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2020.11.19 2020고단4460
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
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 two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 15, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, at the Seogu District Court Branch Branch of Seogu District Court.

On May 2, 2020, at around 04:35, the Defendant driven a B car under the influence of alcohol concentration of approximately 0.128% at the section of about 18km from the front side of the Seogul-gu Yanldong, Seo-gu, Daegu to the point of 122.4km away from the central highway in the Gacheon-do, Seocheon-gu, Seogu.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each statement of the defendant in court;

1. The actual condition survey report, the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, and the inquiry into the results of the regulation of drinking driving;

1. On-site photographs;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, inquiry reports, and investigation reports (the same criminal records and confirmation);

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. The Defendant’s reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on probation and order to attend a meeting is that a traffic accident occurred while driving on an expressway. However, the error is not easy but the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, economic circumstances, etc. are considered, and the punishment is determined as ordered by taking account of various factors of sentencing as shown in the trial process of this case.

arrow