The punishment of the accused shall be determined by eight months of imprisonment.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] The Defendant was sentenced to eight months of imprisonment with labor for a violation of road traffic law at the Seo-gu District Court’s branch on August 14, 2009, and on December 13, 2012, the same court stated in the same court as “six months” in the indictment room for the eight-month indictment for the same crime, etc. However, in light of the evidence records (35,43-47 pages), the Defendant was admitted as such.

A person who was sentenced on August 14, 2013 and was punished for driving under drinking on at least two occasions, such as the termination of the enforcement of the sentence in the Daegu detention center.

[Criminal facts] On December 20, 2015, the Defendant driven B-low-scale car under the influence of alcohol leveling of about 0.086% from approximately 10 meters in the section of about 100 meters of alcohol level to the front and front road of the Seoul Hyundai Pung Pung Pung Pungs, located in 15-6, 76 a.m. 15-6 a.m. in a permanent city of Pung-si, Pung-si, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking and the statement in the circumstances of the driver;

1. Each internal investigation report (related to the details of detection, errors in entry of a place for measuring drinking, and records of suspect drinking);

1. A previous conviction in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (electric power at least twice the driving of drinking, and period of repeated crime), and attached data;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act ( Taking into account the favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing) include a large number of criminal records. In particular, even though the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment on three occasions for the same kind of crime from 2006 to 2012, he/she committed the instant crime even if he/she was sentenced to imprisonment on three occasions during the repeated crime period, and even during the repeated crime period, he/she committed the instant crime. As such, the defendant seems to have been remarkably more than the general public, an active correction is made in a state where he/she is isolated from society for a considerable period.