beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On June 20, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of two million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act and a violation of the Road Traffic Act (non-licensed driving) in the field support on June 20, 208. On July 30, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of three million won for the same crime at the same court on July 30, 201, and on November 9, 2010, sentenced to six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution for the same crime at the same court on the same date.
On March 1, 2014, at around 22:30, the Defendant driven a crocketing car under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.127% without a driver’s license, from around the Geum River basin in front of the Geum River basin in Young-gu, Young-gu, Gangwon-gu to the roads in front of the central market located in the center of the same Eup.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. A performance-based report, a performance-based driver's report, a statement on the actual state of his/her driving, a driver's license register, a traffic accident report, and a traffic accident report;
1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of criminal records and investigation reports (previous and investigation reports) Acts and subordinate statutes;
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. The reasoning for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant had a history of being punished several times due to the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and the defendant's age, happiness, family environment, circumstances after committing criminal acts, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which can be known through the oral argument, are considered as ordered.