A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two 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 October 19, 2006, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Busan District Court's Dong Branch, and on June 13, 2012, a summary order of KRW 4 million for the same crime at the Busan District Court's Busan District Court.

Nevertheless, on November 14, 2020, the Defendant driven a Enic-coo car in the state of alcohol with approximately 0.216% alcohol concentration from the 6km section from around 23:30 on the road near Busan Southern-gu B apartment to the front road located in Busan-gu C, Busan-do.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving under drinking, report on the results of crackdown on driving under drinking, report on the circumstances of the driver under drinking, investigation report (report on the circumstances of the driver under driving under drinking), and response to requests for appraisal;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment to the previous summary order);

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Taking account of the fact that an order to attend a lecture or an order to provide community service is a third drinking driver for the reason of sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and the amount of alcohol content in the blood of the crime record as indicated in the judgment is very high by 0.198% and 0.185%, respectively, and the amount of alcohol content in the blood of this case is highly high, and there is a risk of causing serious harm to an unspecified number of life, body, and property as well as the defendant.