On June 17, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daejeon District Court, and on June 19, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of suspended execution for six months due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving), and on December 19, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to two million won of fine by the same court as a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

On January 10, 2017, the Defendant driven C SP car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.064% in alcohol while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.064% in front of the three-person long-term care hospital located in the same city Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Daejeon.

As a result, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition on drinking at least twice, was driving under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on driving alcohol;

1. Making a statement on the circumstances of the driver employed at the State, making a report on the situation of the driver employed at the State, and making inquiries about management details of the report on detection;

1. An explanatory note;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (Attachment to the same judgment attached thereto) shall be made;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 of the Criminal Code for Reduction of Small Quantity (the favorable circumstances of the defendant among the reasons for sentencing) stipulates that the defendant is aware of and reflects the crime of this case, that the blood alcohol concentration is not high, and that the defendant's health condition is not good, in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant, that the defendant committed the crime of this case again without being aware of the two times of fine due to the same crime, including the criminal records as stated in the judgment of the defendant, one time of suspended sentence, and one time of suspended sentence, and that the current Road Traffic Act provides that the person who violated the provision for prohibition of driving alcohol more strictly.