logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2019.05.23 2019고단506
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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 September 1, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million with fines for violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. in the Gwangju District Court's net support on September 1, 2008, and a summary order of KRW 5 million with fines for violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. on January 14, 2016.

At around 07:00 on March 8, 2019, the Defendant driven a DSS5 vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.150% in the four-meter section of the road in front of the C cafeteria in Gwangju-si B.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking driving twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of the inquiry letter and a copy of each summary order (attached to the investigation report (attached to the same criminal report) shall be attached thereto);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act: (a) the period of time between the defendant's criminal records, the time interval with the previous criminal records, the nature of the crime in this case; (b) the degree of blood alcohol concentration of the defendant at the time of driving of this case; (c) the control process of the crime in this case; (d) the defendant's reflectivity; and (e) the family relationship and other various sentencing conditions

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

arrow