A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On February 29, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of 1.5 million won for a crime of violating road traffic laws at the Daejeon District Court. On August 11, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to six months for a crime of violating road traffic laws at the Daejeon District Court. On August 29, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years for a year for a crime of violating road traffic laws.

On August 28, 2020, the Defendant driven a frost-car under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.140% of alcohol leveling from around 12 km to the front of E in Class D from around 02:0 to around 02:0 around the Daejeon Seo-gu B. The Defendant driven a frost-car under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.140%.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking alcohol, report on the situation of the driver of drinking alcohol, investigation report (report on the situation of the driver of drinking alcohol), investigation report (control circumstances), copy of the register using the measuring instrument for drinking alcohol, and hearing statements by telephone of the witness;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Inquiry into criminal history, investigation reports (related previous convictions and confirmations), summary orders attached thereto, and application of statutes governing judgment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of quantity is that the Defendant, like the first head of the crime in the judgment, had a record of having been punished several times as a crime of drinking alcohol, including a punishment, as stated in the first head of the crime in the judgment. In addition, even though the Defendant had a record of being punished as a crime of drinking alcohol, the Defendant committed the crime in this case, and the Defendant’s drinking value is very heavy in light of the nature of the crime and the criminal intent.

However, since 2014, the defendant seems to have been well aware of and had been in mind since 2014, and the defendant's mistake has been repented in depth, the background leading to this case, and other arguments in this case, such as the character, conduct and environment of the defendant.