A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 19, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving on January 23, 2007), and a fine of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime on January 23, 2007, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million for the same crime on May 20, 2010, and was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 6 million for the same crime on October 22, 2012.

As above, the Defendant had been punished twice or more for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. On July 12, 2016, at around 23:09, the Defendant driven C rocketing car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 0.093% of blood alcohol concentration at the section of about 300 meters in front of the Yellow Sea Safety Center in the same city, from the south-si in the south-si, Sinsi-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, and inquiry report on the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, etc., inquiry reports, summary order, application of statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. The main sentence of Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, which has already been punished five times due to drinking alcohol, and among them, a crime during the suspension period is also committed.

(However, the period of suspension of execution due to the same crime was not the period of suspension of execution). Each blood alcohol concentration was considerably high, and the police officer who was in the patrol seems to have been considerably at the time of the instant case to the extent that the police officer reported the vehicle and demanded the measurement of alcohol.

Considering the above circumstances, even though the defendant should be punished strictly, considerable parts of his previous convictions are old, and there was no accident. The vehicle driven by the defendant at the time of the instant case is somewhat considered in the circumstances leading to driving with the vehicle owned by the company accompanying the defendant's friendship.