On January 3, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 8 months at the Seoul Central District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. On December 13, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 5 million won or more by a fine of 1.5 million won or more due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Southern District Court on December 13, 201, or on January 28, 201, the Seoul East East District Court issued a summary order of 1.5 million won or more for each violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On October 23, 2014, at around 00:45, the Defendant driven a Drocketing car at approximately 4km from the street in the Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, to the roads in front of the Yongsan River located in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, while under the influence of alcohol content of approximately 0.137%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Control note;

1. A written appraisal of blood alcohol;

1. Blood collection (report on detection of a de facto driver);

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports (former records and copies of judgment) and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation has a career of having been punished several times due to drinking driving, etc., and among them, the criminal defendant was punished twice or more due to the occurrence of a traffic accident while drunk driving, and the criminal defendant again committed the crime of this case even though he was under probation for the same kind of crime, it is necessary to strictly punish the criminal defendant in light of the circumstances where he again committed the crime of this case. The reason for the crime of this case, the fact that the criminal defendant is against the criminal defendant, and other various sentencing conditions stated in the argument of this case shall be determined