A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On September 14, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of one million won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving), etc. at the Daegu District Court on July 3, 2015, and was sentenced to a summary order of one million won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daegu District Court on July 3, 2015. On January 16, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment of one year and six months with labor due to the forgery of private documents in the Changwon District Court’s smuggling Branch on May 25, 2014.

[2] On December 27, 2015, the Defendant: (a) driven a D’s franchise vehicle owned C in the section of approximately 200 meters away from the marg-gu Do adjacent to the mar dental road in Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, with alcohol content of 0.101% under the influence of alcohol in around 02:05.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement on the occurrence of traffic accidents;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident and a report on actual condition investigation;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver;

1. Photographs of an accident vehicle;

1. Previous convictions of judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report of investigation (Attachment to previous convictions and previous convictions of the same kind);

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

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes (applicable to a criminal record of forging private documents);

1. In light of the fact that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had a record of punishment several times due to driving under drinking, for the reason of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of quantity, and that he/she again committed the instant crime even though he/she was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million by driving under drinking without being aware of the fact that he/she had a repeated crime while driving under the influence of alcohol, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant with the penalty.

However, the defendant's confession of the crime of this case reflects his mistake, and his age, sex, environment, and motive, means and result of the crime of this case.