A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

except that 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 November 27, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act by the Gwangju District Court.

On July 20, 2020, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol at around 0.115% of blood alcohol concentration on July 22, 2020, driven a vehicle B in the section B from the section B from the Do adjacent to the Pungcheon-dong in the Gwangju Mine-gu to the lower end of the Mannam-dong located in the same Dong-dong.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of the drinking driving control, and inquiry into the results of the drinking driving control;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal history records, probationary records, amounts of dispositions, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes reporting;

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. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances, etc. described in the following sentencing grounds):

1. According to Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act, the Defendant, on the grounds of suspended sentence, was punished as a drunk driving, again committed the instant crime, and the period between the Defendant’s previous conviction and the date of the instant crime is not significant. Since the instant crime was committed, the Defendant is sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant.

However, taking into account the circumstances that may be considered in the course of committing the instant crime, such as the fact that the Defendant has committed the instant crime; the Defendant has no record of punishment heavier than imprisonment with prison labor; and the Defendant’s mistake is pening; and the Defendant’s punishment is to be mitigated within the scope of the applicable punishment; and the period of punishment is to be set within the scope of the applicable punishment; and the execution of the sentence is to be suspended; and the sentence is

(Non-compliance Officer does not order the defendant to attend the law-abiding lecture together in consideration of his previous record).