A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On October 12, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000,000 for a fine for a violation of road traffic law at the Sungnam support center, and on December 13, 2010, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a violation of road traffic law at the Seoul Western District Court on December 13, 201.

피고인은 2017. 7. 15. 18:54 경 용인시 기흥구 동백 동에 있는 SK 셀프 주유소 앞 도로에서부터 같은 구 동백 죽전대로 509에 있는 샤인 힐 스낵 앞 도로에 이르기까지 약 100m 구간에서 혈 중 알콜 농도 0.202% 의 술에 취한 상태로 B 링 컨 MKS 승용차를 운전하였다.

As a result, the Defendant, even though he had been punished twice due to drinking, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Written inquiry about criminal history, etc.;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Attachment to and reporting of the previous summary order and the modification of the applicable provisions of the Act);

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (including circumstances favorable to the examination in the following cases);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (The subsequent consideration has been made for favorable circumstances);

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, family relation, sex, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence as ordered shall be determined.

[ favorable circumstances] The Defendant, who led to the confession of the instant crime, recognized his mistake, did not cause damage to traffic accidents, etc., and the Defendant did not have any record of punishment exceeding a fine, and there was no particular criminal record after around 2010, and the Defendant should support the instant crime.