A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On June 25, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of 1.5 million won for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Gwangju District Court, and on May 20, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 4 months for the same crime in the Southern District Court Branch of the Jeonju District Court.

On April 28, 2015, at around 17:35, the Defendant driven a car with a gallon in a state of alcohol concentration of approximately 0.204%, while under the influence of alcohol from around 3km to the front of the labor village in the case of transfer of the same military.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions: Application of criminal records and investigation reports (limited to criminal records and criminal records of the same kind of suspect and attachment of court records);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation ( Taking into account the favorable conditions of sentencing among the following reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following factors are repeatedly taken into account for sentencing);

1. The Defendant again committed the instant crime despite the fact that the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Probation Act had already been punished three times or more or more due to drinking driving, and the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of drinking driving of the instant case is very high is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the facts that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, the defendant supported the mother of 80 years of age at present, the defendant was punished for a drunk driving in 2008, and the facts that the same kind of crime was not committed prior to the crime of this case before the crime of this case, shall be considered as favorable to the defendant, and the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all other factors of sentencing specified in the arguments of this case.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.