A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On December 11, 2006, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating road traffic law in the Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court on December 11, 2006. On October 13, 2016, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime from Daejeon District Court Branch of the Daejeon District Court on October 13, 201.

Although the Defendant had been in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice, on August 4, 2018, the Defendant driven C-wing and C-Winging in the state of under the influence of alcohol of about 0.104% of alcohol content in the 2km section from the front of the non-cafeteria of the trade name of Masan-si located in the Asan-si on the same side to the same side 79, and the “Pacific Asan-dok-dok-dok-ro” parking lot.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement report and investigation report on the situation of the driver at the main place of business (report on the situation of the driver at the main place of business);

1. Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and the application of a summary order under Part II of the Act and subordinate statutes;

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The consideration of favorable circumstances among the grounds for sentencing);

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is to increase the possibility of traffic accident and to prevent the occurrence of a very dangerous crime that may cause unexpected behaviors to the life and home of others as well as the occurrence of traffic accident. The defendant committed the crime of this case even though he was punished twice due to drinking, as stated in the judgment, even though he had the record of punishing two times due to drinking as stated in the judgment, and the defendant committed the crime of this case. Meanwhile, the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and reflect against the defendant, and the defendant did not have the ability to punish driving of drinking except the power as stated in the judgment, and there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, and other circumstances revealed in the records and changes theory of this case shall be determined as per the order.