On January 20, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), etc. by the District Court of the Republic of Korea on January 20, 201, and on August 4, 201, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving).

On March 24, 2018, at approximately 17:00, the Defendant driven a sports vehicle while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.197% in the five-meter section of the front road of C in Yangju City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving under the liquor:

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

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment to the text of the judgment, etc.), text of the judgment, and summary order statutes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Act on Reduction of Small Amount of Punishment, despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished for the same kind of crime five times, including the fact that he was sentenced to punishment as stated in the judgment of the court in the past due to drinking driving, committed the instant crime again.

In addition, since the blood alcohol concentration at the time of committing the instant crime was relatively high to 0.197% and thus, the risk of traffic accidents was high in proportion thereto.

I seem to appear.

B. Around the driving of a vehicle on the road, the Defendant temporarily stopped a vehicle while driving the vehicle on the road, and the police officer was dispatched to the vehicle upon receiving a report. As such, the above act causes interference with the flow of a vehicle on the nearby road or increases the risk of a traffic accident, the responsibility for the crime is heavy.

In light of this point, it is judged that there is a lack of punishment on the charge of the defendant's attitude to prevent re-offending. Therefore, it is necessary to punish the defendant with heavy punishment to achieve the special preventive effect.

Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to the punishment.