On May 15, 2009, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violating road traffic law (drinking driving) with a fine of KRW 5 million at the Seoul Central District Court on April 5, 2010, and a fine of KRW 2.5 million as a same crime at the Seoul Central District Court on April 5, 2010. On May 29, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2 years of suspension of execution with the same crime.

On February 12, 2016, the Defendant driven B K-7 car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 500 meters from a distance of about 00 meters to the front road of the Library of the Republic of Korea, as long as the Defendant was located in the Esphland from the front of the Ssphland in the Seo-gu U.S., Seo-gu, U.S., Seoyang-si, Seoyang-si, Seoyang-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. C’s statement;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking alcohol and a statement in the circumstances of the driver of drinking alcohol;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as inquiry, reply, and judgment;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

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. In light of the fact that an order to attend a lecture was issued prior to the occurrence of potential danger of driving drinking alcohol for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the records of the same crime as indicated in the judgment of the accused, in particular, even if the execution of imprisonment was suspended, it is necessary to punish the same with severe punishment corresponding thereto.

The alcohol value of the instant case is also high.

However, considering the fact that the defendant is divided, the fact that the accident does not occur, and the fact that the family's livelihood should be responsible is the most favorable condition, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the factors of sentencing, including the time gap between the immediately preceding detection day, the age of the defendant, sex, sex, environment, occupation and career, family relationship, circumstances of the crime, details of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.