A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On June 26, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Cheongju District Court, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of eight million won for a fine in the same court on July 17, 2013, and a summary order of eight million won for the same crime in the same court on December 23, 2013, respectively.

On December 17, 2019, at around 00:25, the Defendant driven a F-wing truck under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.158% of blood alcohol level from about 1km section from the front of the C cafeteria located in the Heung-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Chungcheongnam-gu, to the front of the E cafeteria located in the same city.

As a result, the Defendant violated the “Prohibition of Driving under the influence of alcohol” at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the control of drinking driving, and report on the state of drinking drivers;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal history records, inquiry reports, and investigation reports (report attached to the same kind of power);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the facts of crime, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The social consensus that the harmful effects caused by the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and the high recidivism rate of drinking drivers have to be strengthened due to the occurrence of the harmful effects caused by the drinking driving of alcohol, and the amendment of the law reflecting this has been made and implemented. Although the Defendant had three times the history of drinking driving, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant for committing the instant crime.

However, the favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case as well as reflects the mistake and again made the defendant not to repeat the crime, and that the above previous conviction was before 2013, and that the blood alcohol concentration, the distance of drinking alcohol, the age, character and conduct of the defendant, and the environment.