A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

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 30, 2009, the Defendant, at the Incheon District Court, issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on September 4, 2015, at the same court, issued a summary order of KRW 6 million for the same crime, etc., and violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

On June 19, 2019, at around 07:12, the Defendant driven C K5 cars with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.066% from the 3km section of approximately 3km from the front of the building of the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon, to the front road of the gate Sta Staak Sta Staak Station located in the art of Yeonsu-gu, Incheon.

As a result, the Defendant again driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the prohibition of drunk driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking-driving and the circumstantial statement of the drinking-driving driver;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiry inquiry reports, such as criminal records, and Acts and subordinate statutes to report criminal investigations;

1. Article 148-2(1)1 and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018); the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

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

1. An order of education under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, even though there was a figure of blood alcohol concentration for sentencing, the distance and time of drinking driving, and the record of punishment for drinking driving, resulting in considerable danger to public safety by driving in drinking condition again. The time interval between the crime of this case and the crime of this case after the last record, the time interval between the crime of this case and the crime of this case, the recognition of the crime of this case and the misunderstanding of mistake, and all of the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc., shall