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

[Criminal Power] On March 31, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million by the Seoul Southern District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

【Criminal Facts】

At around 22:50 on July 13, 2020, the Defendant driven a DNA 125CC motorcycle while under the influence of alcohol content of about 400 meters from the Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City to the front road of the same Gu C, while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.162%.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement, the report on the circumstantial statement, the report on the detection of an investigation report (the report on the status of the driver), and the photograph of the closure;

1. Criminal records as indicated in the judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports, and copies of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts, Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act concerning discretionary mitigation of imprisonment with labor;

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

1. Probation, community service order, and order to attend each lecture under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code that the defendant repeats drunk driving (in addition to the criminal records, the records of punishment for drunk driving are more than once). Considering that the defendant repeats drunk driving, there is a need to supervise the defendant so that the defendant does not drive under drinking, and the probation is particularly ordered;

The fact that the drinking water level of this case is close to drinking, that it was controlled by the 112 Report, and the circumstances at the time of regulation are considerably poor, that it seems that there was a high risk that it was excessive in terms of water exemption besides drinking at the time of the case, that it was scarcity to observe the Road Traffic Act, such as driving without a license after the license was revoked due to drinking driving, etc., are unlikely to lead to the Defendant’s unfavorable circumstances or accidents, the driving distance is not long, and the Defendant’s home and social conditions are deemed to be poor, etc.