beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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
[criminal power] On March 15, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million for a fine of KRW 1 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the port branch of the Daegu District Court on March 15, 201, and received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime at the same court on March 17, 2011.
【Criminal Facts】
On August 28, 2015, the Defendant had been punished for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) more than twice, but around 03:00 on August 28, 2015, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.087% of the blood alcohol level, the Defendant driven a car in B the B the car at approximately 2 km from the front of the road of the old Yang-dong X-M (EER) store in front of the Dongdong E-dong EXE store.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on the result of crackdown on drinking driving and on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver;
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal history records, inquiry reports, application of Acts and subordinate statutes;
1. Relevant laws concerning criminal facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty, and the choice of imprisonment;
1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (The following circumstances shall be considered in favor of the accused);
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act: The fact that the defendant has been punished for the same type of crime twice and other circumstances favorable to the fact that there are several times of punishment: The fact that there is no particular traffic accident, the fact that there is no history of punishment exceeding the fine, and the fact that the defendant is against the mistake;