logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2016.04.07 2016고단217
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

[criminal history] On June 4, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of three million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Daegu District Court on the same day, and seven million won for the same crime at the Busan District Court on October 15, 2014.

[ 범죄사실] 피고인은 2015. 12. 19. 17:45 경 혈 중 알콜 농도 0.103 퍼센트의 술에 취한 상태로, 대구 남구 대명동 앞산 네거리 부근 상호 불상의 술집 앞길에서 같은 구 대명로 290 소재 챠밍 오 퓨런스 앞길까지 본인 소유의 B BMW 차량을 1킬로미터 가량 운전하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (the previous and copy of the summary order);

1. The provision of Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime under the relevant provision of the Act;

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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act - The favorable circumstances: The fact that there exists no record of being sentenced to a suspended sentence or heavier punishment, the fact that the defendant commits a crime, which reflects his unfavorable circumstances: The defendant drives drinking again despite the fact that he had been punished twice by a fine due to drinking driving, and the defendant drives drinking again; the defendant's age, sex, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be determined as per the order by taking into account the various kinds of sentencing factors shown in the arguments of this case, such as

arrow