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

except that 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 February 10, 2019, at around 19:03, the Defendant: (a) was boarding the back seat of the E-si seat of the victim D driving on the road located in the B of Busan Northern-gu; (b) was under the influence of alcohol, and (c) was under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant expressed the victim’s bath to “Chewing string” without any justifiable reason; (d) the driver’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son and son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to D or F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation;

1. Article 5-10 (2) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes against the relevant criminal facts;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Discretionary Mitigation and Mitigation Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances shall be considered among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (hereinafter referred to as the following grounds for sentencing)

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months to fifteen years;

2. Reduction elements of punishment (the scope of recommendation range according to the sentencing criteria) Types IV (the scope of recommendation range and recommendation range) and reduction factors according to the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months to two years (the lowest limit of the sentencing range recommended by the sentencing guidelines is inconsistent with the statutory minimum limit of the applicable sentencing range, and thus the minimum of the applicable sentencing range in law is inconsistent with the statutory minimum of the applicable sentencing range).

3. According to the decision of sentence, the sentence shall be determined as ordered by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances and the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and result of the crime, and various factors of sentencing as shown in the arguments in this case, including the circumstances after the crime.

The defendant is at a disadvantage.