A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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

【The Defendant issued, on February 1, 2010, a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Incheon District Court, and a summary order of KRW 7 million for the same crime at the same court on May 10, 2012, respectively.

【Criminal facts” around November 18, 2018: (a) around 15:25, the Defendant driven a D-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W-W

Accordingly, although the defendant had been punished more than twice as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, he was driving a vehicle under the influence of re-driving despite the fact that he had been punished.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on drinking;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and an investigation report (Attachment to a summary order related to the same kind of force as the suspect);

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

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 crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Provide community service and attend lectures is a situation unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant, who had been punished twice or more due to drinking driving, once again drives a vehicle, has not been less than the nature of the crime due to driving under drinking, the amount of alcohol concentration exceeds 0.219% at the time of detection, and the occurrence of a traffic accident involving physical damage while driving under drinking, etc.

On the other hand, the defendant's recognition of the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, there is no past record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine for the same crime before, and the family wanting to have the wife of the defendant simply and the defendant does not drive drinking again.

Gabling.