beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Criminal facts
On May 13, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million with a fine of KRW 1,00,000 due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving under the influence of drinking), and a summary order of KRW 7,00,000 with the same court on February 12, 2008 (driving under the influence of drinking).
As above, the Defendant, who was punished twice as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and was under the influence of 0.162% of the blood alcohol concentration on the roads front of the Hai-dong Government, Hai-dong on December 24, 2013, on the roads before the Hai-dong, the Defendant, without a driver’s license, driven B Pod Motor Vehicle at a approximately five-meter range.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Report on detection of a drinking driver, report on the status of a drinking driver, and inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking;
1. The ledger of driver's licenses;
1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: An inquiry of criminal history, inquiry of criminal history, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes (Attachment to summary orders of the same kind of power);
1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting a crime (the point of a sound driving) and subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 152 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act;
1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;
1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;
1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. The positive circumstances for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act: The Defendant again committed the instant crime, even though he/she had a record of punishment for the same kind of crime on at least two occasions, despite the fact that the Defendant had committed the instant crime;