On August 11, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of three million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Suwon District Court, and on April 30, 2008, the Incheon District Court issued a summary order of KRW 3.5 million for the same crime at the Incheon District Court, and on September 18, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Sungwon District Court's Sungnam Branch Branch.

Nevertheless, at around 19:00 on April 5, 2020, the Defendant driven a Dschton car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.262% at the section of about 1k from the Do of the Seocho-dong Seocho-dong Seocho Village Road to the front of C in the same Gu as Dong-dong.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the Road Traffic Act prohibition provisions at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, and notification on the control of drinking driving (blood collection result);

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Criminal history records, inquiry reports (A), investigation reports (Attachment to the same type of judgment), and copies of the judgment-applicable Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant had already been punished four times or more due to drunk driving including punishment for suspension of the execution of imprisonment, but the defendant also conducted the pertinent drunk driving. In addition, considering the risk that drunk driving may affect many and unspecified persons and the purport of the amendment of the Act increased by statutory penalty, the nature of the crime is not weak.

In addition, the defendant had a high blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving, and the risk was also high, and the defendant actually caused a traffic accident.

However, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, and various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the record, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.