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

[criminal power] On December 5, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the resident support of the Daegu District Court on December 5, 2013, and on October 22, 2014, in the resident support of the Daegu District Court, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving).

【Criminal Facts】

On January 25, 2020, at around 14:20, the Defendant driven a car with C observer in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.05% from the 1km section to the front road at the time of residence on a road where it is impossible to identify a place less than the spatho in the Spatho site at the time of stay.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act prohibiting driving under the influence of alcohol at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver, and notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident, a yellow survey report, and an accident site photograph;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports;

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

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the defendant had the record of being punished twice as a drunk driving even before the crime of this case, and that he/she is engaged in a drunk driving.

However, considering the fact that the previous criminal records of the accused are both fines, the elderly of the defendant in 1939, and the blood alcohol content of the defendant in 1935% is 0.05%, the punishment shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the defendant's age and behavior environment, motive means of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the arguments and records, including the circumstances after the crime, and the execution of the punishment shall be suspended only once. It is so decided as per Disposition