A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On August 25, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 from the Incheon District Court to a fine of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act; on October 27, 2010, a summary order of KRW 2 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Incheon District Court; on December 19, 201, the Seoul Western District Court received a summary order of KRW 2.5 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Seoul Western District Court; on July 6, 2012, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2,50,000 from the Incheon District Court’s Busan District Court’s Busan District Court’s Busan District Court’s Busan District Court’s Vice Branch for a suspended sentence of six months; and on August 8, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

【Criminal Facts】

On November 28, 2018, at around 18:20, the Defendant driven Cchier car while under the influence of alcohol of about 0.116% of blood alcohol concentration at the 10km section from the Do in front of the cafeteria, Jeju Do, Jeju, to the roads in front of the Incheon-gun Village B, Incheon, the Defendant driven Cchier car at around 10km.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. In light of the fact that there are five times of punishment (three times of fine and two years of the suspension of the execution of imprisonment) due to the same type of crime with the same reason for sentencing (hereinafter referred to as “the reasons for sentencing”) under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation, and that the defendant has a relatively high degree of blood alcohol concentration, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant ultimately because the treatment in society has no effect as a special prevention for the prevention of recidivism, since it is judged that there is no effect as a special prevention of recidivism.

However, it is against the defendant's view to committing a crime.