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 November 3, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million at the Suwon District Court's Suwon District Court as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving in Drinking), and KRW 700,000 as a fine at the Suwon District Court on October 17, 2008.

【Criminal Facts】

On February 22, 2020, at around 00:11, the Defendant driven DK5 automobiles with approximately 0.184 percent alcohol concentration at the section of about 10 kilometers from 0:00 to 0.184 percent of alcohol content in the front of the C elementary school located in Osan-si.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the report on the state of drinking drivers and the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records before ruling: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (report accompanied by a summary order of the same kind of power), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the summary order;

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures is that the defendant had been punished for drunk driving, and the drinking driving of this case was conducted at the same time, and considering the risk of drinking driving to many and unspecified persons and the purport of the amendment of the amended Act, the quality of the crime is not less complicated.

However, considering the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, that there is no record that the defendant has been punished for a stay of execution or more yet, and that there is no record of punishment for the defendant, and other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the record, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc