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

On February 16, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and KRW 7 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the same court on September 13, 2016.

On October 20, 2019, at around 22:15, the Defendant driven a B-7 car under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.118% from the mutual and aesthetic convenience store in the Seongbuk-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si to the front road from around 200 meters away from the same sex stop level to the front road.

As a result, the Defendant violated the regulations on the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice.

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. Application of second-class Acts and subordinate statutes to reply to criminal records, etc. and copies of summary order;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation ( Taking into account the favorable conditions of sentencing among the following reasons for sentencing):

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, such as probation, community service order, and order to attend a meeting, is a very dangerous crime that may cause unexpected behaviors to the life and family of others by raising the possibility of traffic accidents, and thus, in order to prevent this, the defendant is bound to bear strict responsibility for the act related thereto. The defendant committed the crime of drinking driving in this case even though he was punished several times due to drinking driving including the record of criminal facts stated in the judgment, and the defendant committed the crime of drinking driving in this case. Meanwhile, the defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime in this case, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment exceeding fines due to drinking driving, and the records and arguments such as the numerical value of blood alcohol concentration in this case are considered.