A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 April 15, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 3 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the same court on November 2, 2016.

On September 27, 2019, at around 01:27, the Defendant driven a Cnibane car in the state of alcohol of about 0.110% of blood alcohol concentration at the 1km section from the front road of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Seongbukdong District, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul to the front road of the same Gu B.

As a result, the defendant violated the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on drunk driving, report on the circumstances of drunk driving, and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drunk driving;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (verification of the same kind of power);

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. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration shall be made again for the reason of sentencing);

1. Probation, community service order, and order to attend the meeting of the Criminal Act 【Scope of the sentence imposed under the law】 One year or two years or more of imprisonment with prison labor / 1 year or six years or more of imprisonment with prison labor / 1 year or 2 years or / 3 years of suspension of execution / The Defendant, as stated in the first head of the crime in the judgment, was under the control of re-driving while driving a motor vehicle again even though he had been sentenced to a fine twice due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act, as stated in the first head of the crime in the judgment. The Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration at the time of the crime in this case and other various sentencing conditions such as the Defendant’