A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On October 7, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Gangnam Branch of the Chuncheon District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving). On February 4, 2016, the Seoul Southern District Court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a period of eight months.

【Criminal Facts】

1. Around 01:33 June 12, 2018, the Defendant driven a Fpoter II truck with a blood alcohol concentration of approximately 0.175% in the section of approximately 2 km from the Do adjacent to C in Suwon-si B to the front road located in D in the same city area of the city.

2. The Defendant damaged the property damage in front of the E-way located in the area D located in the area of the passenger line at the time and time and time specified in Paragraph 1, thereby damaging the non-repair cost, such as putting the victim G Hpod flus and parking the car in front of the Defendant’s office, and destroying the connected part of the said car owned by the victim by hand.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement, investigation report, and notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. A damaged vehicle, on-site photograph, CCTV image CD;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry records, and Acts and subordinate statutes appended to judgment;

1. Article 148-2(1)1 and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 15530, Mar. 27, 2018); Article 366 of the Criminal Act; Articles 366 of the Criminal Act; Articles 148-2(1)1 and 44(1) of the same Act (amended by Act No. 15530, Mar. 27

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendant denies the criminal act under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act on discretionary mitigation.

However, in light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the court shall do so.