A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be postponed for one year and six months from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On April 29, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million by the Changwon District Court for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

Criminal facts

On July 26, 2020, at around 01:05, the Defendant driven a DNA passenger car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.118% from a section of about 900 meters to the front road of the “Seoul Yangsan-si B hotel” on the road of the “Seoul Yangsan-si B hotel” to the front road of the “Seoul Yangsan-si apartment.”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving, report on the circumstances of drinking drivers, and investigation report (report on the circumstances of drinking drivers);

1. Scenesics by field photographs and CCTV images;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, etc., and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiry reports and investigation reports;

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. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as “reasons for discretionary mitigation”), which is favorable to the defendant, is considered in light of circumstances favorable to the defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the repeated consideration of conditions favorable to the above defendant);

1. In addition, even though there was a history of punishment twice as a drinking driving prior to the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the crime of drinking driving in this case was committed, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration level at the time is high, and thus, the criminal liability is not weak, and the vehicle is driven under the influence of alcohol.

The fact that stopping and diving are discovered in the middle of the road is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The fact that the risk of traffic accidents has not been realized due to these crimes, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and is against the depth is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, such as the criminal records, age, motive and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered.