A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On November 2, 2017, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million as a crime of violating road traffic law (drinking driving) in the Gwangju District Court’s net support on November 2, 2017.

[Criminal facts] On November 18, 2020, the Defendant driven a E Spo-type car under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.137% from a section of about 300 meters from the front of the apartment house B at the Spo-si to the D Drinering road at the Spo-si.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Examination of the defendant's legal records of crackdown on driving alcohol;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving at home, report on the occurrence of a traffic accident, report on the occurrence of a traffic accident, report on a traffic accident (report on actual condition), and records of crime in the judgment on site photographs of a traffic accident: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment of a summary order attached to drinking record), and application of a summary order of 821 attached to the Gwangju District Court Order 2017 Gocheon-gu, 2017;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2(1) and 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 2020) on criminal facts

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including the observation of protection and the order to provide community service and attend lectures, recognizes and reflects the crime of this case, but there is a need to strictly punish the social harm caused by drinking driving, as the social harm caused by drinking is very serious.

Considering the fact that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration reaches 0.137%, and that the Defendant was subject to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in 2017, such as the record of the crime in the judgment, but was re-offending within a short time, the Defendant’s liability is somewhat weak.

subsection (b) of this section.

In addition, the circumstances leading the defendant to drive the drinking of this case, the alcohol concentration and driving distance of the blood of this case, and the crime of driving the drinking of this case.