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

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 February 21, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million at the Seoul Central District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on April 22, 2009, a fine of KRW 2 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on April 22, 2009, and on November 16, 2012, a fine of KRW 5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul East District Court on November 16, 2012, and was punished for a drunk driving more than twice.

On May 28, 2019, at around 00:36, the Defendant driven C Almatma car while under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.087% at the section of about 8km from Songpa-gu Seoul to front road of Seongbuk-gu Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving under the influence of alcohol, inquiry into the results of crackdown on driving under the influence of alcohol, and circumstantial statement of the drinking driver;

1. Previous records: Application of inquiries, such as criminal records, etc., an inquiry inquiry report, an aesthetic background before disposition, and a report on results of confirmation (attached to a summary order);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018);

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures is that the defendant, in addition to the previous conviction in the judgment, has a record of criminal punishment once due to drinking driving, and it is not good that the crime is committed.

However, the fact that the defendant shows his criminal act and reflects, that the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant was not very high by 0.087%, that there was no traffic accident due to the crime of this case, that there was no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, and that there was no other history of the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, family relationship, and circumstances at the time of the crime.