A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, 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 September 24, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of a fine of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 2 million for the same crime in the same court on September 17, 2012, respectively.

On November 23, 2019, at around 23:45, the Defendant driven a horse-free car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 500 meters alcohol concentration of approximately 0.064% from the 500m section to the front roads of D located in the Daegu Western-gu B market.

Accordingly, the defendant was driving under drinking not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigation report (report on the circumstances of an immigration driver);

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Criminal records as indicated in the judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, investigation reports, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures is four times of a fine for a drunk driving in the past (the history of a fine imposed in 198 and 1999, respectively, appears to have been caused by a drunk driving), and two times of suspended sentence of imprisonment, etc., and the defendant repeated the same crime again even though he/she had a record of criminal punishment twice.

At the time of the instant case, the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration is considerably high to 0.064%.

In light of these points, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant has been aware of the fact of the crime, and that there was no record of criminal punishment after October 2012, etc. are considered as favorable to the defendant. In addition, the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, family environment, circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered as favorable to the defendant.