On October 4, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of one million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daejeon District Court, and on November 29, 201, the Defendant was issued a summary order of 2.5 million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Young-gu District Court’s Young-dong Branch on November 29, 201, and on November 13, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years by imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daejeon District Court on November 13, 2017.

On August 3, 2020, at around 21:15, the Defendant driven a rocketing vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of approximately 1.5 km from around 1.5 km to the lower part of the same shot line in front of a restaurant in the name of the U.S. adjacent to the Daejeon Seo-gu New Carbon Station.

Accordingly, the defendant has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as criminal records, inquiry reports, and summary orders;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing selective sentence of imprisonment with prison labor;

(a) favorable condition: The defendant reflects his mistake while recognizing the crime of this case;

B. Unfavorable conditions: (a) the Defendant had already been punished several times as before the instant case was held as a drunk driving; (b) the Defendant again committed the instant crime without being well aware of it; (c) the blood alcohol concentration was high; and (d) the Defendant’s repeated criminal act was not the basis of the driver’s license; and (c) the Defendant’s repeated criminal act needs to protect good citizens and society.

C. The Defendant’s punishment was determined in consideration of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and other various sentencing conditions specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act as indicated in the records of the instant case.