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

【Criminal Power】 On April 29, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by the Incheon District Court for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and on October 29, 2015, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】 The Defendant is a person driving a passenger car in any column B.

The Defendant is a person who was subject to a disposition of drinking under the influence of alcohol on April 29, 2014 (driving under the influence of alcohol) and October 29, 2015 (driving under the influence of alcohol).

Nevertheless, on August 24, 2018: 02:10% of the blood alcohol concentration of 0.137%, Seoul Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, at the place where the calculated Dong of Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, cannot be known.

C. Up to the preceding day, approximately 10 km was driven as the above vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. A report on detection of a host driver;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports, application of the Acts and subordinate statutes applicable to indictments;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

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

1. The crime of this case on the ground 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 that the defendant, who had been punished twice or more due to drunk driving, once again drives a car, whose nature of the crime is not weak, and whose blood alcohol content is equal to 0.137% at the time of detection, and that the blood alcohol content is equal to 0.137% at the time of detection, and that the police officer dispatched was locked while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, and that the police officer was forced to immediately drive the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime of this case and reflects the mistake, that there is no past record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine due to the same crime, and that the defendant does not drive under the influence of alcohol again.