A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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 16, 2013 and October 1, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million and a fine of KRW 700,000,00 from the Gwangju District Court for each of the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

On June 3, 2019, at around 22:10, the Defendant driven a B-low vehicle under the influence of alcohol with approximately 200 meters alcohol concentration of 0.122% from the section of approximately 200 meters to the front road of the White-ro, 599, G-dong, Gwangju-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement statement and investigation report of the employer (the circumstantial report of the employer-employed driver);

1. Criminal records: To refer to inquiries, and to the application of each summary order statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2(1)1 and 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018); the choice of imprisonment for a crime

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1448, Apr. 2, 20

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (hereinafter “the grounds for the suspended sentence”), whichever is favorable, has been repeatedly considered;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. lies in the defendant's previous convictions of fines for several times, and among them, the previous convictions of drinking alcohol and the previous convictions of driving without a license each time.

Nevertheless, the defendant is not only responsible for traffic accidents while driving under the influence of alcohol at the time, but also the amount of alcohol concentration at the time is relatively high.

However, the above facts are considered in favor of the defendant, including the previous conviction for drinking alcohol driving, that the previous conviction for drinking alcohol driving was prior to 2013, that the previous conviction for drinking alcohol driving was prior to 2013, and that the defendant is in profoundly against the crime of this case.

In addition, the motive of drinking driving, the place where drinking driving is conducted, and the distance.