On June 12, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 1.5 million won for a crime of violating road traffic laws (drinking driving) in the Changwon District Court's Msan Branch on June 12, 2012, and on November 25, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 6 months for a crime of violating road traffic laws (drinking driving), and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 3, 2015.

On August 3, 2017, around 17:19, the Defendant driven B 3 trucks with alcohol content of about 400 meters in the section of 400 meters, while under the influence of alcohol of about 0.125% in blood, from the front of the indoor ridge 121-22, 40,000, Seo-gu, Busan, Seo-gu, Busan, to the front of the ridge 333 in the city of the mountain-ro of the same Gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiry statements, investigation reporting statutes, such as criminal history;

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 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of quantity was sentenced to three times of fine and one time of suspended sentence due to drinking driving, even though the defendant was sentenced to three times of imprisonment and one time of suspended sentence, the crime of this case was committed at the same time during the period of suspended sentence, and the degree of alcohol concentration in blood and alcohol level was high (in the case of the previous drinking crime, the alcohol concentration in blood was very high) as well as the danger that the defendant caused a traffic accident that shocks the electric telegrams, it is difficult to achieve the purpose of punishment due to a fine or a suspended sentence.

The sentence shall be sentenced as it appears.

The punishment was determined in consideration of various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments in this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime.