On June 2, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of two million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Changwon District Court's Jinju branch on June 2, 2008. On April 15, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime in the same court on April 15, 2009, and on February 15, 2013, for the same crime in the same court on February 15, 2013, respectively.

On July 26, 2015, at around 21:55, the Defendant driven Cone Star-Cor in the state of alcohol alcohol content of approximately 200 meters from the Haak Market front of the Haak Market located in Jinju-si to the other apartment front road located in the same Dong around that time to the other apartment zone.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the regulation of drinking driving, that of the control of drinking driving, that of the control of drinking driving, and that of the state of drinking drivers;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, judgment, application of summary order-related 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. In light of the fact that the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “Discretionary Mitigation”) committed the instant crime even if the Defendant had been punished four times or more for drunk driving, and the Defendant committed the instant crime even if he/she was punished for the suspended sentence on two occasions, it is inevitable to punish the Defendant with severe punishment.

However, the fact that the defendant reflects his crime, that the blood alcohol content of the defendant is not significantly high, that there is no penalty power for the defendant, etc. shall be considered as favorable circumstances for the defendant, and the punishment shall be determined as per the order in consideration of the various sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the age, character and conduct of the defendant.