A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

[Criminal Power] On November 15, 2017, the Defendant is a person who has received a summary order of a fine of KRW 1.5 million from the Ulsan District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

【Criminal Facts】

On December 20, 2019, on December 23:16, 2019, the Defendant driven B rocketing car with approximately 500 meters alcohol concentration of 0.181% from the parking lot of the culture and arts center located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do to the prosperity in the same old-dong.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written inquiry about the results of the control of drinking driving conducted on December 23, 2019;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements and investigation report of a host driver;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of inquiry reports and investigation reports (verification reports of the same kind of force) related to criminal records, etc.;

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;

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as “reasons for discretionary mitigation”), which is favorable to the defendant, is considered in light of circumstances favorable to the defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the repeated consideration of conditions favorable to the above defendant);

1. Although there was a record of two times of punishment due to drinking driving prior to the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the Defendant committed the instant crime of drinking alcohol, and the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration level at the time is considerably high, and thus, the Defendant’s liability for the crime is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

The fact that the distance from which drinking driving is short is short, the risk of traffic accidents is not realized due to this case, the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime, and there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine due to the same kind of crime.

In addition, the age, character and conduct, environment, occupation, motive of crime, etc. of the defendant and the conditions of sentencing as shown in the pleadings.