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

On December 9, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On May 23, 2020, at around 22:00, the Defendant driven a DNA car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 70 meters alcohol concentration of about 0.217% from the front day of the gas station in the Hongdo-dong, Daejeon to the front day of the Dong-gu, Daejeon to the roads in the same Gu C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Arrest report of the occurrence of the case of violation of the Road Traffic Act, internal investigation report, notification of the results of the crackdown on drunk driving, inquiry into the results thereof, report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, investigation report, control records, 112 report records, 112 report records, investigation status report (Listening to suspect A telephone statement) and vehicle register;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal records, previous records of disposition and report on the results thereof, and application of summary order 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. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The circumstances favorable to the accused below):

1. The danger and harm of drinking alcohol under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is very serious. The blood alcohol concentration at the time is heavy in light of the circumstances of the bailee who should not drive under absolute influence, and circumstances such as the possibility of criticism in the previous records of the judgment are acknowledged to be disadvantageous to the defendant. However, the circumstances of the crime are somewhat different, such as the following: although the defendant is recognized that there is a possibility of criticism in the previous records of the judgment, the mistake is divided in depth; the person is driving on behalf of the defendant, and the person arrives at the place where the other person's vehicle is divided into friendship and dialogue; and the other person's vehicle is parked at the place of the control in this case after driving the vehicle at a 70-meter level, and the vehicle was parked at the place of the control.