A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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 March 25, 201, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million at the Seoul Eastern District Court on March 25, 201, a summary order of KRW 4 million at the Seoul Southern District Court on July 2, 2013, and a summary order of KRW 4 million at the Jungnam District Court on July 2, 2015, respectively.

On July 18, 2020, at around 02:39, the Defendant driven Cp motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.239% from the section of approximately 200 meters from 00 meters to B before the road.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the Road Traffic Act's prohibition of drinking driving or refusing to measure drinking more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the occurrence of the case;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver, report on the circumstances of a drinking driver, and notification on the results of the crackdown on drinking;

1. Records of judgment: Application of three copies of criminal records, reply reports, and summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for probation and community service order is that the defendant, who has a record of driving under drinking, drives under the influence of alcohol, has a high level of blood alcohol concentration due to the drinking of this case.

The defendant has already been punished for driving under the influence of three times, and there is a lot of possibility of criticism in that he was driving under the influence of alcohol without being aware of it even though he was under the suspension of the execution due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act.

However, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, completed special traffic safety education conducted by the Road Traffic Authority after the crime of this case, and completed the defendant's drinking driving force in 201.