However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal history] On July 27, 2018, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Suwon District Court’s Eunpyeong District Court’s Eunpyeong District Court.

[Criminal facts] On October 4, 2020, the Defendant driven a e-car car at a level of 0.141% alcohol level in the 3km section in the south-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Nam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City. From around 00:10 on October 4, 2020, the Defendant driven a car at a level of 0.141% under the influence of alcohol level in the south-gu, Nam-gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant was driving in violation of the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement report on the circumstances of a driver who is placed in driving, and notification of the results of regulating drinking;

1. A statement of blood gathering;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Voluntary submission and verification of blood collection, and the list of seizure;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (verification report on the past records of the same type of crime), summary order (No. 3396 highest assistance 2018 highest assistance), and one summary order (No. 3396);

1. Article 148-2(1) and Article 44-2(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 2020), Articles 148-2(1) and 44(1) of the same Act, the selection of punishment for a crime

2. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution;

3. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of Order to Attend Courses.

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years but not more than five years;

2. Non-application of the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria are not prepared for offenses of violating the Road Traffic Act;

3. The driving of a sentence under the influence of alcohol is a crime in which not only the person himself but also another person's life can be taken, and is highly dangerous.

Even though the defendant was punished for drinking driving as stated in the ruling, he is again driving in a drinking state, and his criminal liability is not weak.

The amount of alcohol concentration in blood is relatively high.

However, the defendant seems to have led to the confession and reflect on all the crimes of this case.

Only a single fine has the history of punishment.

In addition, the defendant's age, sex, environment, and motive and motive to commit the crime.