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

Punishment of the crime

On September 9, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 3 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Northern District Court, and on June 7, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 3 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Jungyang Branch Branch of the Jung-gu District Court on March 7, 201, and on April 18, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of KRW 6 months for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving). On May 2, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment of KRW 8 months due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Goyang Branch Branch of the Seoul Northern District Court on March 30, 201, and the period of parole on June 30, 2015 during the execution of the sentence at a government prison.

On July 23, 2016, at around 06:05, the Defendant driven CWz car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.126% from the front of the 8 complex of light village in front of the 8 complex in front of the 06:20 day from the day before the 06:20 day from the day before the 8 complex of light village in front of the 400m width to the road before the 8 complex in front of the 400m width.

As a result, although the defendant was punished not less than twice due to drinking driving, he was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiry into the result of the crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Statement on the circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Previouss before and after judgments: Criminal records, inquiry reports, judgments attached to investigation reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing summary orders;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (Selection of Imprisonment or Imprisonment);

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Code for discretionary mitigation is that there are a large number of records of driving under the same conditions as the previous conviction in the judgment of the defendant, and that there is a high possibility of criticism in light of the fact that the crime of this case is committed during the same repeated crime period.

The general risk of road traffic that the defendant will bring about, and the safety and trust of the driver of another vehicle shall be lost.