A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 July 28, 2009, the Defendant is a person who has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol by receiving a summary order of KRW 4 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daejeon District Court on July 28, 200.

On August 12, 2019, at around 22:25, the Defendant driven a dived vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.132% in a section of about 1km from a nearby parking lot located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, to the 1st class of the letter located in the 105th class of the Gu so-called “C” to the 1st class of the 1st class of the letter.

Accordingly, the defendant, even though he had a power to drive a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, was driving a motor vehicle again under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement, investigation report, and notification of the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Criminal history records, etc., an inquiry inquiry report, an investigation report (Attachment to a summary order of the same kind of power), and the application of a copy of a summary order;

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act requires that an order to attend a lecture would pose a significant risk to the public safety by driving under drinking condition, even though there were the records of punishment for drunk driving and time, and the driving under drinking condition, the time interval between the crime of this case and the crime of this case after the last record of the same kind, the time interval between the crime of this case and the crime of this case is recognized, the consultation and medical treatment are combined, and the office vehicle is not re-offending, such as returning it to the company, etc. In addition, the punishment as the order shall be determined by taking into account all the sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances of the crime, and circumstances after the crime.