A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 11, 201, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Changwon District Court, and on May 6, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Changwon District Court.

On August 4, 2020, around 03:05, the Defendant driven a F rocketing car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.170% at a section of about 100 meters from the road front of the parking lot C located in the window B at Changwon-si, Seoul, to the road front of the E parking lot located in the window D at Changwon-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The circumstantial report on the driver's statement, the report on internal investigation (the statement of a suspect and the confirmation of CCTV on-site) as a result of the control of drinking driving, and the investigation report (the calculation of alcohol concentration in blood);

1. Previous conviction: Application of a written inquiry about criminal history and summary order, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the grounds of the order to provide community service and attend lectures is to have an impact on people's physical ability to drive drinking, thereby causing traffic accidents, and the risk of recidivism is high for drinking driving.

Although the Defendant was punished twice due to drinking as stated in the judgment, he again driven a drinking again without any warning about the danger of drinking, even though he was punished.

The Defendant, while driving a vehicle, stopped the vehicle on the lane of the place indicated in the judgment, and locked at the driver’s seat, and was discovered on August 4, 202 by reporting another person’s 112.

In light of the degree of state operation measured at the time of detection, the defendant seems to have been able to take the place at the time of driving.

However, the Defendant, against the instant crime, did not repeat the crime.

The defendant was not punished for more than a fine due to drinking.