[criminal history] On February 9, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of a fine of KRW 9 million due to a violation of road traffic law in the Gwangju District Court’s net support on February 9, 2012, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1 million on June 14, 2013 by the Gwangju District Court for a violation of road traffic law at the Gwangju District Court, and was sentenced to six months of imprisonment on June 14, 2013 and completed the execution of the sentence at the Southern Prison on December 12, 2013, and was 8 times of driving

[Criminal facts] On December 6, 2015, the Defendant driven B rocketing car under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.058% from the front line of the “Sastaeb” in the Seocho-dong 248-1, Young-dong 248-1, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-dong, to the sast and front route of the same time during the same period.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking at least twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Fact-finding reports on drivers of drinking alcohol and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking alcohol;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (report on the recent same criminal history), personal identification and current status of acceptance by each individual;

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. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount is favorable circumstances, such as the confession and reflection of the instant crime.

However, the Defendant has already been punished five times by a fine due to drinking driving, etc., the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, and would not drive drinking again.

in this case, the vehicle was sold to others.

Although a motor vehicle registration certificate was submitted to the court, the seller is deemed to be his/her cohabitant C and thus is highly likely to repeat the crime.