beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal power] On July 6, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of four months by imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Incheon District Court on July 6, 2009, and on September 11, 2013, the same kind of criminal record was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years by imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and three times more in addition to a suspended sentence of two years by the same court.
【Criminal Facts】
1. On March 10, 2015, the Defendant, without a driver’s license, driven a K-Adi vehicle at a distance of about 500 meters from the nearest to the pressure-driven station in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, while under the influence of alcohol at a level of 0.101% of blood alcohol level on March 10, 2015.
Accordingly, the Defendant again driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, as a person who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice.
2. The Defendant’s unlawful uttering of official document was an unlawful uttering of official document by presenting a LA driver’s license, who was required to present his/her identification card, before Gangnam-gu Seoul Labor Relations Commission, at the time and time set forth in paragraph (1).
3. The Defendant: (a) forged private document; (b) at the time and place specified in Paragraph (2); (c) stated that the Defendant offered a driver’s license as above; (c) signed the document made with personal information of L, such as voluntary written consent prepared by the controlling police officer; (d) a written report on the circumstances of the drinking driver; and (e) a notice of the results of the influence of drinking driving; and (c) forged the document’s voluntary written consent for driving in the name of L, which is a private document concerning the certificate of fact without authority; and (d) immediately submitted the forged private document to the police officer in charge of crackdown who did not know of the forged fact at the same place to use the forged private document.
Summary of Evidence
1. The defendant;