A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 10, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million on the grounds of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of noise measurement) at an Ansan Branch of the Suwon District Court, and KRW 5 million on April 25, 201, on the grounds of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of noise measurement).

On July 26, 2020, at around 3:20, the Defendant driven a DSS6 car in the state of alcohol with approximately 10km alcohol concentration of about 0.173% from the 10km section to the intersection of the “C” located in the next city of Busan.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigation report on actual condition, report on accident site photograph, report on the circumstances of a drinking driver, investigation report (report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver), response to requests for appraisal, and notification of the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, references to criminal records, amounts of dispositions, results of confirmation, and reporting;

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

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as the following grounds for sentencing);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of sentencing)

1. In light of the risk of accidents caused by drinking driving in the current road traffic situation where many and unspecified persons habitually use the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and the possibility of occurrence of serious damage caused thereby, the social necessity to strict drinking driving is very high.

The purpose of legislation is to stipulate the statutory penalty for driving under the Road Traffic Act not less than 2 years but not more than 5 years, and a fine not less than 10,000 won but not more than 20,000 won, which reflects the purpose of legislation.

Although the defendant had been already punished for drinking driving several times, there is no room for justification, and there is a large criticism in that he has been forced to drive under drinking in the state of drinking.

However, the defendant is closely reflecting the crime, and the crime is committed.