1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year;

2. Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

3.

Punishment of the crime

On April 8, 2011, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act by Daejeon District Court.

On October 6, 2020, the Defendant driven a “C” restaurant located in Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon, Daejeon to the front road of the “E” restaurant located in the same Gu D from approximately 200 meters section to the front road of the “E” restaurant located in the same Gu. The Defendant driven a F low-speed car while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.139% in blood.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act prohibiting driving of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

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

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous conviction: Application of a written inquiry and a summary order, such as criminal history;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime;

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 of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the grounds of the crime of this case, at the time of the crime of this case, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration was relatively high as 0.139%, and the Defendant was in an inaccurate and unbrupted state at the time of enforcement of the control.

Nevertheless, since the defendant has greatly increased the risk of traffic accident by driving a motor vehicle, the illegality of the crime is serious.

In addition, the defendant committed the crime of this case again even though there are a majority of the past records that committed the crime of traffic on the road including the past records of punishment for drinking driving, such as the previous records of the crime in the past, and there is a high possibility of criticism.

However, it is reasonable to consider the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant acknowledges and reflects the crime of this case, and that the defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine for the crime of drinking driving.