A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On September 1, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million for a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving) at the Seoul Eastern District Court on September 1, 2006, and a fine of KRW 5 million for the same crime, etc. at the Seoul Southern District Court on November 3, 2015.

【Criminal facts” around June 4, 2018, around 21:50, the Defendant driven a Btopppp-free car under the influence of alcohol content of approximately 0.080% from the 15km section from the front of a mutually influent restaurant located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Mapo-gu, Seoul to the front road of the Sungwon apartment located in 21-ro 21-gil, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Investigation report (report on the situation of the driver in charge); and

1. Previous conviction: Inquiry about criminal history and application of the Acts and subordinate statutes reporting criminal history;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (referring to driving under influence of alcohol) applicable to the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment for imprisonment, and the choice of punishment;

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 under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act seems to be inevitable to choose a sentence of imprisonment in a lump sum because the defendant had the record of having been sentenced five times or more due to drinking driving.

However, the defendant did not cause a separate traffic accident due to the drinking driving of this case, the amount of alcohol concentration of the defendant's blood does not reach the level of revocation of driver's license, the defendant's previous 10 years' previous drinking driving is limited to once, the remainder is the previous crime, the defendant has no record of being punished more than a suspended sentence, the defendant has no record of being punished more than a suspended sentence, and the defendant has divided and reflected his mistake, and sentenced a suspended sentence after lowering the lower limit of the sentence.

In addition, in order to prevent recidivism, the defendant ordered the defendant to attend a compliance instruction.