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

On May 6, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 by the Changwon District Court for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On June 14, 2020, at around 20:35, the Defendant driven D-Wz E350 automobiles in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.225% at the section of about 20km from the road near the C Bank located in Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si B to the roads front of Gangseo-gu, Busan Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal history records, inquiry reports, and application of two copies of summary order-order 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;

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on probation, community service order, and order to attend a lecture (the order to undergo diagnosis and treatment of alcohol dependence during the period of probation with special matters to improve the drinking habits of the accused) was revised to the purport that the current Road Traffic Act is to achieve the general preventive effect of punishment by strengthening the control standards and statutory punishment for drinking driving, eradicating social damage caused by drinking driving, eradicating social damage caused by drinking, and establishing a traffic order.

Although the Defendant had been punished twice due to drinking driving, including the previous conviction stated in the judgment, he re-driving without the awareness of the danger of drinking driving.

At night, the Defendant was under control while driving on an expressway, and the driving distance is very long.

At the time of detection, according to the defendant's condition or the degree of exploitation, the defendant was taken into custody.

However, the Defendant committed the instant crime in profoundly and did not repeat the crime.

The defendant was not punished for more than a fine due to drinking driving.

(b) other.