A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On May 15, 2009, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by the Ulsan District Court for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 4 million by the same court on August 22, 2013, respectively.

【Criminal Facts】

On April 27, 2019, at around 06:55, the Defendant driven C truck under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.063% from the 10km section from the front of his residence in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, to the Gluri road in front of the Glsan-gun, Ulsan-gun.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking under the Road Traffic Act more than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement statement and investigation report of the employer (the circumstantial report of the employer-employed driver);

1. Inquiry into the result of the crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018) (amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 201);

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as “reasons for discretionary mitigation”), which is favorable to the defendant, is considered in light of circumstances favorable to the defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the repeated consideration of conditions favorable to the above defendant);

1. The fact that the driving of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol is not good in spite of the fact that there was a history of punishment for two-time driving on the ground of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Attend the lecture, the distance of the driving of the motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol is reasonable, and in light of the frequency, contents, and timing of punishment for the same kind of crime, the liability for the crime is not less complicated, but the defendant appears to have an attitude to recognize and reflect his criminal act, and the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant at the time is not higher than the previous one.