logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 안산지원 2017.11.23 2017고단2683
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] The defendant was sentenced to a summary order of 2 million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Incheon District Court on January 2, 2007, and was sentenced to a summary order of 2 million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act on May 28, 2008, and was sentenced to a fine of 2 million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act on August 13, 2009, and was sentenced to imprisonment for 5 months for a suspended sentence of 1 year for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Ansan Support of the Suwon Flag Flag, and one year for a suspended sentence of 8 million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act on November 10, 2014.

[2] On September 6, 2017, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol at around 00:07, driven a vehicle B at approximately 1 km from around 1 km to the front of the private distance of the Water Resources Construction Work in the same location, from around the trade name in the Singu-si, Sing-si, Sinju-si, under the influence of alcohol content of 0.27%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Fact-finding reports on drivers of drinking alcohol and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking alcohol;

1. Previous conviction: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a reply to inquiry, investigation report (the confirmation of the criminal suspect's previous conviction, etc. in the same kind), and judgment;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (the favorable circumstances such as the violation of the crime) is against the defendant, and the fact that the defendant does not drive drinking again is more favorable.

However, even though the Defendant had been sentenced to three times of fine due to drinking driving from 2006 to 2016 and one time of suspended sentence, the crime is not good in that the Defendant committed the instant drinking driving crime, and the amount of alcohol concentration in blood is very high.

In order to realize the awareness of driving under the influence of alcohol, it is inevitable to sentence a sentence.

In addition, the defendant's age, sex, environment, and crime of this case.

arrow