A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

At around 00:00 on September 16, 2019, the Defendant driven Drocketing car from around 310 meters to the front road of the Kiju-si B apartment at around 0.258% alcohol level.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to stickerss notified as a result of drinking driving control;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (3) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. In light of the fact that the statutory punishment for the drinking-driving crime has been continuously aggravated due to serious social harm caused by drinking-driving and changes in the legal sentiment of the general public, etc., the crime of drinking-driving is in need of strict punishment.

At the time of the defendant's drunk driving, the blood alcohol concentration was very high to 0.258%, and was only high to the extent that police officers at the time were unable to memory the fact discovered.

The favorable circumstances: The defendant reflects the crime of this case.

A relatively short distance has been driven by the defendant.

There is no record that the defendant was punished by imprisonment or more severe punishment.

Other circumstances, such as the age, character and conduct, the environment, the motive and background of the crime, the result of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for the sentencing as shown in the arguments in this case, shall be determined as the sentence as