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 history] On May 24, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of fine of one million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Gunsan Branch of the Jeonju District Court, and one million won for the same crime in the same court on January 11, 2017.

[Criminal facts] On December 30, 2017, the Defendant driven a e-sports car while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.188% in the 10-meter section of D in front of D on the street in the 10th century around 05:30 on December 30, 2017.

As a result, the Defendant, who committed a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at least twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver in charge of driving, consent to and confirmation of blood collection, investigation report (report on the circumstances of the driver in charge of driving), notification of the results of crackdown on driving of drinking, request for blood appraisal, reply to blood, and inquiry about the results of crackdown on driving of drinking;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment to the summary order of the same kind of power);

1. The provision of Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime under the relevant provision of the Act;

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 is that the defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had the same criminal history, and that the defendant's blood alcohol concentration level at the time of driving the instant drinking is considerably high is disadvantageous.

However, the defendant's mistake is divided, and his/her substitute driving is not possible, and the parking has been parked, and it seems that he/she has driven a short distance for movement parking.

In full view of these circumstances and the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, the sentencing conditions as shown in the pleadings shall be determined as ordered.