A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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.

On June 14, 2012, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 4 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on June 14, 2012, and a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on May 30, 2017.

Criminal facts

On August 17, 2018, at around 02:00, the Defendant driven BMW car under the influence of alcohol content of about 20 meters from the parking lot located in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Old-ro 84 to the same 81-1st road.

As a result, the Defendant again driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, who violated the prohibition of drinking at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. A report on the results of pulmon analysis and detection of the main driver;

1. Accident scene and vehicle photograph;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, investigation report (the same kind of force) and other relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the part of the defendant was that the defendant driven a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, even though he was subject to criminal punishment twice (two times a punishment) due to driving under drinking, and the criminal liability of the defendant is not weak.

However, the circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, the distance of driving alcohol was relatively short, and the fact that there was no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine during that period.

In the above circumstances, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.