A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 14, 2015, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Ulsan District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and on August 1, 2017, the Ulsan District Court received a summary order of KRW 4 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

Nevertheless, at around 22:45 on November 7, 2020, the Defendant driven a Bsch Rex sports car under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.112% in the section of approximately 3.8km from the 3.8km northwest-gu, Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu to the epoch high level of sexual traffic.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) or 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries into the results of regulating driving of drinking alcohol, a statement of the circumstances of the driver of drinking alcohol, and an investigation report (report on the circumstances of the driver of drinking alcohol);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiries, such as criminal history, replys to inquiries, investigation reports (the same kind of force);

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 (hereinafter “reasons for sentencing”), 53 and 55(1)3 of the Act on the Mitigation of Small Quantity, which are favorable to the Defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the conditions favorable to the above defendant shall be repeatedly considered);

1. Although the Defendant had been subject to three times punishment due to drinking prior to the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the Defendant committed the crime of drinking in this case at the same time, and the Defendant’s blood concentration level at the time is high, and thus, the Defendant’s liability for the crime is disadvantageous to him.

The fact that the risk of traffic accidents has not been realized due to these crimes, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and is against the depth is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of all the circumstances, such as the defendant's age, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, the punishment as ordered.