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 February 5, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Ulsan District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

On August 11, 2019, at around 22:36, the Defendant driven a car owned by the Defendant E-line, while under the influence of alcohol with approximately 400 meters alcohol concentration of about 0.109%, from the 400-meter section to the roads front of the Diju-gun, Ulsan-gun, U.S., B Loans, to the roads in front of the Diju station located in C.

The defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less 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. Inquiry into the result of the crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal records, investigation reports (report attached to the same attached records), and copies of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

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. 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. Although there was a history of punishment for the same kind of driving under the influence of alcohol for the reason of sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the fact that driving of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol at the time is not good, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration level at the time is high, and the possibility of criticism is not small in light of the circumstances against the defendant, the defendant's attitude to recognize and reflect his criminal act, the distance of driving under the influence of alcohol does not change, but the risk of traffic accident is not realized due to this case's crime, there is no criminal record exceeding the fine, and there is no particular criminal record more than 12 years after February 2007, and the wife and children must be supported.