A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On October 31, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. at the Daejeon District Court on October 31, 2012. On July 19, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of six million won by the same court for the same crime, etc.

On November 14, 2019, at around 22:50, the Defendant driven a F vehicle under the influence of alcohol with approximately 200 meters alcohol concentration of about 0.155% from the front of the restaurant C, where it is impossible to know the trade name in the large exhibition Dong B, to the front road of the animal hospital located in the same Dong-gu.

As a result, the Defendant driven a car under the influence of alcohol not less than twice in violation of the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. A report on detection of a host driver;

1. Investigation report (Report on the status of an employee);

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. An accident site photograph;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (reports on confirmation of criminal records of the same kind A of a suspect), application of statutes of judgment;

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. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation was the higher level than 0.155% of the Defendant’s blood alcohol content at the time of the instant crime. At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in an inaccurate and inaccurate manner at the time of the control, thereby raising the level of the introduction.

Nevertheless, the defendant, while driving a motor vehicle while driving a motor vehicle, has realized the risk of traffic accidents inherent in a drinking-driving crime by causing a traffic accident that shocks the motor vehicle that has driven the motor vehicle normally. Therefore, the illegality of the crime of this case is high.

The defendant has committed three times a crime of drinking driving in the past.

In particular, the defendant had the record of having been sentenced to imprisonment due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act, as before the judgment, but again had the same record.