1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year;

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

3.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On March 25, 2016, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Busan District Court’s Branch Branch.

【Criminal Facts】

On September 21, 2020, at around 17:30, the Defendant driven a D-hurd-hurged car with approximately 5km alcohol concentration of 0.231% while under the influence of alcohol on the section of about 5km from the roads near Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si to the front road of the same C-Sastro.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking driving, and report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal history records, inquiry reports, confirmation of criminal records of violations of the Road Traffic Act, and application of 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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the driving of drinking alcohol can cause serious damage to the life, body, and property of another person, so the corresponding punishment is needed.

In addition, even though the defendant was punished as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in 2016, he/she committed the same crime at once, so his/her responsibility cannot be deemed to be less than that of the defendant.

The blood alcohol concentration measured was 0.231% and it was difficult to drive normally.

(A) The Defendant was aware of the fact of drunk driving by a police officer who called up after causing a traffic accident: Provided, That the same sentence as the order shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s character and behavior, age, motive and background of the crime; (b) circumstances after the crime; (c) the degree of blood alcohol concentration; and (d) the interval between the previous drunk driving and the previous driving.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.