[criminal history] On March 25, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a fine for a crime of violating road traffic law in the public order branch of the Daejeon District Court on March 25, 2008, and a summary order of KRW 3 million as a fine in the same court on May 2, 2014.

[2] On March 25, 2018, the Defendant: (a) was a person who violated the provisions of the Road Traffic Act that prohibit the driving of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol not less than twice as stated in a criminal record; and (b) was driving the Dpoter II cargo under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.137% in alcohol level from the 2km section of approximately 2km to the south of the Geum River in the same Simdong-dong, Cheong-dong, Cheong-dong, Gi-si, Cheong-dong, to a restaurant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (the same criminal record and confirmation of the suspect);

1. Relevant legal provisions regarding criminal facts, Articles 148-2(1)1 and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act regarding the selective sentencing of imprisonment, and the grounds for sentencing of punishment are considered to reflect in depth by recognizing all the mistakes of the Defendant, and both the Defendant’s family members and scriptives desire to leave the Defendant’s wife.

However, the defendant has already been convicted of driving two or more times of drinking.

The two identical crimes confirmed by the record are all crimes committed during about 10 years from the crime of this case, and the degree of drinking at the time of the crime of this case is not easy.

Considering the defendant's behavior of drinking driving, it is not reasonable to sentence a fine or a suspended sentence of imprisonment.

Therefore, the sentence of imprisonment with prison labor shall be imposed on the accused, but it shall be taken into account in favor of the accused’s reflectivity, etc., as well as the degree of alcohol in blood alcohol at the time of the crime, and the interval between the past and the instant crime.