logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.04.12 2018고단23
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On March 10, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), and a summary order of KRW 1.5 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in the same court on October 1, 2015, respectively.

On December 26, 2017, the Defendant driven a BSpo vehicle from around 600 meters in the section of 600 meters to the front road of the Green Dok Park in the 11st of the same hour, in the state of alcohol level of 0.091% among the blood transfusions around 23:30 on December 26, 2017.

As a result, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking driving twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous conviction in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, and a copy of each summary order;

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. In full view of the records of the instant case and the various sentencing conditions indicated in the theory of changes, such as the criminal records of the Defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the observation of protection and observation, the degree of alcohol concentration among the blood of the Defendant at the time of driving of the instant case, driving distance, the family relationship of the Defendant, and the fact that the Defendant reflects wrong

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

arrow