[criminal power] On September 21, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence for six months by imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court. On May 21, 2009, the Daegu District Court notified a fine of KRW 5 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act. On September 25, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 6 million by imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court on February 23, 2015 and completed the execution of the sentence at the Daegu District Court on February 23, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

On August 26, 2016, the Defendant, as a person who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act two or more times, driven a Cunstam vehicle under the influence of alcohol with approximately 0.127% of blood alcohol concentration on the 1km section of approximately 1km from the front road of the wing-dong, Nam-gu, Daegu Metropolitan City, to the front road of the wing-dong, Daegu Metropolitan City, the front road of the wing-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, Daegu Metropolitan City, to the front road of the Do 459 Dollick

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, and report on the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports, judgment, application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the status of confinement of individuals;

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

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant reflects the crime and needs to support his/her children in an difficult economic environment. However, the defendant has already been punished more than 10 times for traffic-related crimes including drinking driving, and the defendant has already committed the crime of this case during the aggravated period of repeated crimes due to drinking driving. In light of the fact that the drinking level at the time of drinking driving of this case is considerably high, a sentence of sentence against the defendant is inevitable.

Other various arguments in this case, such as the age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment of the defendant, motive, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.