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 November 7, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a year by imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. in the Gwangju District Court's net support on November 7, 2007. On October 29, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of 2.5 million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Gwangju District Court's net support.

On November 18, 2019, at around 07:24, the Defendant driven a fluent car in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 150 meters from a section of approximately 150 meters from the roads near the C Cooperatives located in D to the roads front of the Egypt.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employer-employed driver (A);

1. Making inquiries into the results of the drinking driving control (A);

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, criminal investigation reports (Attachment to the same type of judgment), judgment, application of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

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. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the provision of community service and order to attend lectures was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year for drinking driving, etc. in 2007 and the defendant was sentenced to a fine due to drinking driving in 2009, and the defendant's liability for the crime is not easy.

However, the drinking water level is not high at 0.070%, and it appears that the above numerical value appears to have come out because the previous drinking water was put under the influence of alcohol after the previous drinking, and there is a considerable time interval between the final drinking power and the drinking driving of this case, the defendant's mistake and reflects the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, circumstances leading to the crime of this case, etc., and various conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments and records are taken into account.