A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 23, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million due to a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving), etc. in the support for the safe flow of water sources, and on March 2, 2012, on March 2, 2012, the Seoul Southern District Court issued a summary order of KRW 5 million due to a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving).

On September 10, 2016, around 10:05, the Defendant driven a Cpoter II motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.146% in a section of about 100 meters from the 8th day before the Geumcheon-gu Seoul, Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Masan 96, a large social gathering entannam-ro 8th day of the Hanil-gu, Guro-gu to the front shooting distance of apartment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver;

1. Previous conviction: Application of a written inquiry, such as criminal history, and of each summary order;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44-2 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act include: (a) the fact that the Defendant had been able to drive alcohol twice but the instant crime was committed; (b) the drinking value is relatively high; and (c) the fact that the Defendant was detained due to his/her failure to attend the trial despite being aware of the progress of the trial, is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, there are favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant was unable to attend the trial due to his influence and the absence of trial, that the defendant was at an economic disadvantage due to the crime of this case, that the defendant was at an economic disadvantage due to the loss of work, that there was no criminal record other than the fine due to the driving of drinking, and that these criminal records are not concentrated at a short time.

In light of these various circumstances, the defendant is punished by imprisonment with prison labor, taking into account the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the age and family environment of the defendant.