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

[criminal power] On October 22, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of two million won as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court, and on January 8, 2018, a fine of two million won for the same crime from the Sungnam Branch of Suwon District Court to the same offense.

【Criminal Facts】

Although the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, at around 02:00 on June 30, 2020, the Defendant again driven Dinti G37S car at the section of about 5.3 km of about 126 km in the front of the “C” located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.098% (hereinafter “C”).

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Report on the circumstances of the defendant's legal statement, and investigation report on the results of the regulation of drinking driving (report on the circumstances of the drinking driver);

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, investigation reports, and investigation reports;

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 under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act is that the blood alcohol concentration, driving distance, and driving background of the instant case are mainly considered, and that the Defendant re-driving a motor vehicle despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished twice due to drunk driving, etc., appears to reflect the Defendant’s wrongness, and that the Defendant disposed of the motor vehicle after the instant case, and that the Defendant has no other criminal records, other than the two-time fine, are considered as favorable circumstances, respectively.

In addition, the sentencing conditions shown in the instant case, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after crimes, shall be determined as per Disposition.