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.

Criminal facts

On October 22, 2014, the Defendant received a summary order of a fine of three million won from the Daejeon District Court for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter referred to as the fluence driving) and received two times the records of drinking driving.

On July 13, 2020, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.114% from blood alcohol level on July 17:25, 2020, driven Esch Rexroth car at approximately 300 meters from C cafeteria to D cafeteria located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Previous records of the defendant's statement in his/her court statement: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as criminal records;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, 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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is a serious crime that causes serious danger and injury to the life, body, property, etc. of an unqualified person. Thus, the defendant who committed the crime of this case should be held legally liable for severe liability corresponding to the act. The defendant also committed the crime of this case even though he had been punished twice or once due to drunk driving. The defendant's blood alcohol concentration was very high at the time of the crime of this case. The defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime of this case, and all other circumstances shown in the records and arguments of this case, including the circumstances after the crime of this case, shall be determined as ordered by considering comprehensive consideration.