However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On March 5, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Gunsan Branch of the Jeonju District Court on March 5, 2013.

On November 7, 2019, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol at 0.071% of blood alcohol level, driven a F Poter truck from approximately 4km to the front side of the office of “C” located in Gunsan-si B to the front day of the “Egy” in D.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of driving motor vehicles, etc. under the influence of alcohol not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking driving, and report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver;

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, investigation reports (a summary order attached to the same type of power);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as the following grounds for sentencing);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of sentencing)

1. In light of the risk of accidents caused by drinking driving in the current road traffic situation where many and unspecified persons habitually use the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and the possibility of occurrence of serious damage caused thereby, the social necessity to strict drinking driving is very high.

The purpose of legislation is to stipulate the statutory penalty for driving under the Road Traffic Act not less than 2 years but not more than 5 years, and a fine not less than 10,000 won but not more than 20,000 won, which reflects the purpose of legislation.

Although the defendant had already been punished for drunk driving, he is likely to be criticized in that he re-offending again.

However, the defendant reflects in depth the crime, taking into account all the conditions of sentencing, including the details of the crime, the situation before and after the crime, the age of the defendant, the family environment, etc., and the sentence as ordered within the scope of punishment that has been mitigated only once.