The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. It is reasonable to interpret that “a person who violates Article 44(1)(Prohibition of Drinking) at least twice” as stipulated in Article 148-2(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act as “a person who violates Article 44(1)(Prohibition of Drinking)” includes a person who has been controlled by drinking and has not yet received a court’s final judgment.

In doing so, in interpreting the above provision, the court below is not sufficient to limit the drinking driving more than twice, and it means only the person who has been convicted on not less than two occasions due to drinking driving, and the defendant has been acquitted on the grounds of this part of the facts charged. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

2. Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, as to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, prohibits the driving of a motor vehicle, etc. while under the influence of alcohol, and Article 148-2(1)1 of the Act (hereinafter “instant provision”) provides that “any person who violates Article 44(1) on at least two occasions,” who drives a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, in violation of Article 44(1), shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for at least one year up to three years, or by a fine of at least 5 million, but not exceeding 10 million won.”

The instant provision simply provides that the subject of the act is not limited to a person who has violated the prohibition on drinking at least twice, and is not limited to a case where the person was sentenced to punishment or was convicted of violating the prohibition on drinking alcohol driving.

The purpose of this is to strengthen the punishment for repeated drinking driving by reflecting the normative nature of the person who repeatedly violates the prohibition of drinking driving regulations, namely, the lack of compliance spirit or safety awareness with the traffic laws and regulations, and to prevent risks to the life and body of the people caused by drinking driving, and to establish traffic order.

In full view of the language and text, legislative intent, etc. of the instant provision, the instant case is intended.