logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 장흥지원 2017.10.26 2017고단150
도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Text

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for four months: Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On July 25, 2017, around 15:25, the Defendant driven a Cpoter II cargo vehicle while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.067% at a section of approximately 1.5 km from the front of the Filial Village in Heung-gun, Busan to the front of the Filial Village in the same Myeon to the front of the Filial Village in the same Myeon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to report on detection of suspects violating road traffic laws and notification of the results of drinking driving control;

1. Article 148-2 (2) 3 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense and Articles 148-2 (2) 3 and 44-2 (Selection of Imprisonment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. In full view of the elements of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, and all the conditions of sentencing as indicated in the pleadings, such as the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the sentence shall be determined as ordered.

The factors of favorable sentencing: The fact that the defendant recognized his mistake and reflecteds, that the defendant needs continuous treatment due to the blood dystye in the present color, that the defendant's constant treatment is difficult due to the power failure in the left-hand slot, etc.: The fact that the driver's previous convictions are four times, and that the previous driver's previous convictions are six times (the fact that there is a suspicion of compliance driving).

arrow