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

[criminal power] On August 11, 2006, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Daejeon District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a fine of KRW 3 million from the same court on March 27, 2007 to a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

On July 24, 2020, at around 00:24, the Defendant driven an E Lastren car with the blood alcohol concentration of about 0.089% in the 3km section from the front of the Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon to the front of the same Gu D Building.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Report on detection of a drinking driver, report on the circumstances of a drinking driver, report on the circumstances of a drinking driving, photographs at the drinking control site, and investigation report on the enemy (report on the circumstances of a drinking driver);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports (A), investigation reports (three-time confirmations of sound records), and statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation ( normal consideration in favor of the accused among the reasons for sentencing below);

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act requires the punishment corresponding to the crimes that may cause serious damage to the life, body and property of others.

Although the Defendant had been punished three times due to drinking driving, the Defendant committed the instant crime and has a high possibility of criticism.

At the time of crime, the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant is not low, and the distance of the defendant's driving is also long, so the nature of the crime and the circumstances of the crime are not easy.

However, the defendant seems to reflect his mistake by recognizing the crime of this case and disposing of the vehicle.