On February 22, 2017, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by the Daejeon District Court for a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a fine of KRW 2 million by the same court on August 9, 2018, respectively.

On January 14, 2019, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of drunk driving twice or more, driven a D-to-purd vehicle from approximately 300 meters away from the roads adjacent to Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon to Daejeon Seo-gu, while under the influence of alcohol by 0.106% of alcohol level on January 14, 2019.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Arrest report on occurrence of the case, internal investigation report, details of enforcement, notification of the results of the control of drinking driving, inquiry into the results of fact, statement of the circumstances of drinking drivers, circumstantial report of drinking drivers, and the register of driver's licenses;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal records, investigation reports (whether they fall under the preceding sentence of the same kind and whether they fall under Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the Road Traffic Act), and copies of each summary order;

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 (hereinafter the following sentencing grounds) recognizes the instant crime, and is the age that has not yet much social experience, and the driving distance is relatively short.

However, the crime of this case is punishable two times or more for a short period of time by the defendant, and it is so long that the defendant was driven while under the influence of alcohol. The crime of this case is very heavy in light of the danger and harm of drinking driving and the degree of the degree of blood alcohol concentration at the time.

In addition, the defendant has criminal records punished twice for driving without a license, in addition to the criminal records punished for driving under influence of alcohol.

In addition, the defendant does not seem to repent of wrong facts.

Therefore, the defendant is the defendant.