A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

[Criminal Power] On July 2, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million at the Busan District Court as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

On October 11, 2019, at around 02:05, the Defendant driven a F Lastton car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.246% from the front road in Busan Jin-gu B to the front road in the same Gu D.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. Investigation report (report on the circumstances of an immigration driver);

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

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

4. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than one year nor more than two years and not more than six months;

2. Not applying the sentencing criteria: The sentencing criteria are not yet prepared for the crimes of violating the Road Traffic Act;

3. The decision-making driving of the sentence is not only abrupt of itself, but also a crime that can bring the life of an unspecified person, and is highly dangerous.

On July 2, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3.5 million by the Busan District Court for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

Although the defendant was punished for driving under the influence of alcohol before, he/she is again driving under the influence of alcohol, and his/her responsibility for such crime is not weak.

The defendant's blood alcohol concentration is also very high.

These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant seems to have led to the confession and reflect of the crime of this case.

The defendant has only the ability to punish drinking once, and the influence of drinking punishment is about 9 years.

more than a fine.