A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

Around 18:45 on February 8, 2020, the Defendant driven Dco-sports cargo vehicles in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.250% at approximately 200 meters from the front of the Ccafeteria in the B market to the said B market parking lot.

Around 19:30 on March 26, 2020, the Defendant driven a Dcois sports cargo vehicle at the section of about 2.8 km from the front of the F cafeteria located in the city E in the city of the State to the front of the culture and arts center located in the same city as the culture and arts center in the same city, while under the influence of alcohol 0.097%.

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

Summary of Evidence

"200 Highest 1058"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver, and report on the control of drinking-drivings "20 Highest 2049";

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver, and notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous records: Criminal records and other inquiries, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (verification of pending cases);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 148-2 (3) 1 of the Road Traffic Act (the point of driving under the influence of alcohol on February 8, 202) and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of driving under the influence of alcohol on March 26, 2020), the choice of imprisonment for each sentence;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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 of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant had the same criminal records as a result of drinking driving, even though the trial on the crime of drinking driving had been continued, it is inevitable to choose a sentence of imprisonment, considering the fact that the defendant had a criminal record of drinking driving.

However, there are circumstances such as the fact that the defendant has not been punished by a fine or heavier punishment, and that the defendant has divided his mistake.

This is the time of the crime of this case.