1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year;

2. Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

3.

Punishment of the crime

On November 17, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 to a fine for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking) at the Daejeon District Court.

On September 9, 2020, the Defendant driven Bco or automobile under the influence of alcohol content of about 7km from around 02:02 to around 0.094% of alcohol content in blood at around 0.094% from the section of about 7km to the passenger frame 95 in the same household, from the cafeteria-dong, Seosung-gu, Daejeon.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Investigation report (report on the situation of the driver in charge); and

1. Notice of the result of crackdown on driving drinking;

1. On-site photographs and photographs showing the suspect's drinking;

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 provisions of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the ground of the sentencing of the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of the instant crime was relatively high by 0.094%, and the Defendant’s walk at the time of enforcement was considerably high and inaccurate, and the degree of the principal practice was also reasonable.

Nevertheless, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle, and the Defendant was under control by a police officer who was dispatched to the signal at the intersection by taking a scam while driving the motor vehicle, and the risk of traffic accident has been significantly increased due to the above drinking driving. Therefore, the illegality of the crime is serious.

In addition, the defendant committed the crime of this case again even though he had been punished for drinking driving like the criminal facts in the past, and there is a high possibility of criticism.

However, the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime of this case.