A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On June 5, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of a fine of 1.5 million won for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court, and on August 29, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years for the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court, and on August 29, 2013, the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 6, 2013.

On July 24, 2015, at around 00:00 and around 0.070% of blood alcohol concentration, the Defendant driven a B-hand vehicle from the front side of the “Dong Neuri Station” in the same city of Taedong-dong to the front side of the Andong-dong Road located in the same city of Andong-dong to the same city of Andong-dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of the control of drinking driving, report on the state of drinking drivers' state statement, and report on the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records: Application of criminal records and investigation reports (Attachment of criminal records of a suspect) and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the Defendant had been punished for driving under the influence of alcohol in the past several times during the period of suspension of execution. In particular, in 2012, the Defendant was in the vehicle and accident where the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol or without a license, and the victim was under the influence of eight weeks.

Nevertheless, the defendant had re-driving while under the suspension of execution, and the punishment of the previous fine and the suspension of execution cannot prevent the defendant from drinking practice, so the defendant's punishment is sentenced.

However, in consideration of the fact that the drinking water in this case is low and that the speech and walking condition at the time were good, that the probation period was excessive, and that the defendant was divided in depth, the minimum sentence to be mitigated shall be sentenced, but the statutory detention should not be imposed.