A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 13, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the support of the Daejeon District Court on the Incheon District Court.

On January 5, 2020, at around 00:47, the Defendant, who was under the influence of alcohol and was punished for driving a motor vehicle, etc., driving CM7 motor vehicles under the influence of alcohol at approximately 0.187% under the influence of alcohol at approximately 3km from the Do in front of the mutual influence in the new, south-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu. to the intersection adjacent to the same Gu B apartment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement on the occurrence of a traffic accident in DNA;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on drinking driving, and inquiry of the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. An accident site photograph;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (related to the same kind of suspect's power), and application of two copies of relevant summary orders;

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;

2. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years but not more than five years;

2. Non-application of the sentencing criteria: The offense of violation of the Road Traffic Act as stated in the judgment is not prepared in the sentencing criteria.

3. The decision-making driving of a sentence is a crime which may bring the life of a person as well as his own, and is highly dangerous.

As stated in the ruling, the Defendant is punished as a drinking driving, but he is re-driving, and the responsibility for such crime is not less complicated.

The blood alcohol concentration is relatively high.

Nevertheless, the circumstances after the crime are not good, such as failure to attend this court.

However, the defendant seems to have led to the confession and reflect of the crime of this case from the investigative agency.

There is no power of punishment heavier than a fine.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, the environment, and the motive and motive of committing the crime.