A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had been punished three times due to the same kind of crime, and that the blood alcohol concentration is considerably high by 0.18%, etc. is disadvantageous.

However, considering the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s mistake in depth and reflects the Defendant’s mistake, the fact that there has been a aged parent in need of support, and the fact that he undergoes surgery in an acute condition in June 2020, etc., and other favorable conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, background of the crime, circumstances before and after the crime, driving distance, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

3. Since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is ruled again after pleading.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by this court and summary of evidence are the same as stated in each corresponding column of the judgment below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

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

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination of the sentencing grounds of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act by comprehensively taking account of the various sentencing grounds for the reasons for the above appeal, the sentence as ordered shall be determined.