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 January 16, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of a fine of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, in the Daejeon District Court Seosan Branch.

1. Around 21:00 on March 27, 2020, the Defendant driven DPoter Ⅱ Cargo Vehicles at approximately 2 meters from the road front of the B apartment C-dong parking lot in Seosan-si, Seosan-si, 0.17% alcohol level.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

2. Around 06:00 on March 28, 2020, the Defendant driven D 2 truck from about 3km to the front road of the apartment complex, via the front road in the city E from Seosan-si B apartment Cdong to 0.053% of blood alcohol concentration.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Notification of the result of the drinking driving control of Defendant's statutory statements;

1. Inquiry inquiry reports, including criminal records of circumstantial statements from a host driver, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a summary order;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order of Education and the Order of Community Service was that the Defendant had been convicted of driving under drinking three times, and repeated driving under drinking twice in the process of driving under drinking.

However, the fact that the defendant was controlled by the police officer in the course of seeking to find the borrower of the damaged vehicle following the accident, that the defendant's mistake was caused by his mistake, and that there is no penalty power imposed on the defendant, shall be considered as the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

In addition, considering the following circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances leading to crimes, and circumstances after crimes.