Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

Punishment of the crime

On June 12, 2014, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million at the Jeju District Court for a fine of KRW 1 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act; KRW 5 million for the same crime at the same court on November 20, 2015; and KRW 6 million for the same crime, etc. on February 10, 2017; and on May 25, 2018, the Defendant completed the execution of the sentence at the Changwon District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Changwon District Court for the first instance on November 24, 2018.

On January 29, 2020, at around 21:30, the Defendant driven a Ddlim ridge with approximately 2 km section from the front side of the Busan Seo-gu Office located in Seo-gu, Busan to the front side of the Criju station located in the same Gu and located in the same Gu B, while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.199%.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement on the circumstances of a drinking driver, investigation report (report on the circumstances of a drinking driver), and inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking driving;

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

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. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation has recently been raised as the day of social awareness about the harm and injury of drunk driving, and the punishment under the Road Traffic Act for drunk driving has also been raised.

The fact that the defendant was sentenced to criminal records of the same kind and was sentenced to a repeated crime period, the fact that the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant is significant is that the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant that the defendant did not realize the risk of drinking driving, such as causing traffic accidents, etc.

The age, character, conduct and environment of the defendant, and this case.