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

except that 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 July 11, 2006, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Northern District Court, which was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 2 million for a fine of KRW 2 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Eastern District Court on January 26, 2007, and on May 27, 2016 at the Seoul East East Eastern District Court, which was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

In addition, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for 9 months with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Sung-nam branch of the Suwon District Court on November 21, 2018, and the judgment becomes final and conclusive on November 28, 2018 and is currently under probation period.

【Criminal Facts】

Despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished twice or more for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) as above, the Defendant driven a CKaman car with a blood alcohol content of about 0.065% on September 22, 2018 from the road located in the Hannam-si, Busan Metropolitan City, under the influence of alcohol level of about 300 meters to the road located in the same city B.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver and report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Criminal records as indicated in the judgment: Application of inquiry reports, such as criminal records, and investigation reports (applicable to the previous records and confirmation reports of a suspect);

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. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the defendant's reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) has been already punished several times due to drinking driving, but the responsibility for the crime is very serious, but the defendant's mistake is recognized and seriously against himself/herself, and there are circumstances that can be considered in relation to equity with the case where the judgment becomes final and conclusive along with the crime where the judgment becomes final and conclusive.