logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2019.03.21 2018고단2177
도로교통법위반(음주운전)등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On November 23, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the violation of the Road Traffic Act. On September 3, 2013, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 4 million on September 21, 2013. On June 21, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million for the same crime.

On September 17:25, 2018, the Defendant driven a DNA car with an alcohol level of 0.151% under the influence of alcohol without obtaining a driving license in approximately 150 meters from the public parking lot B in the petition-gu to the front of the same Gu C, Cheongju-si.

As a result, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Notification of the result of the drinking driving control;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, etc., investigation reports (verification during the period of the same kind of records driving and the suspension of execution);

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting a crime (the point of a sound driving) and subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 152 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed for a violation of the Road Traffic Act heavier than that of a punishment);

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is recognized as the crime of sentencing and is inconsistent with the erroneous determination, rather than causing serious consequences of personal injury, and the fact that many of the defendant's prisons desire to dismiss the defendant's wife, etc., and again committed the instant crime during the suspension period of execution, and is disadvantageous to the defendant, such as the fact that he/she again committed the instant crime during the suspension of execution, and that he/she has a very high blood alcohol concentration.

arrow