A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by a fine at the Incheon District Court on February 18, 2009 for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on May 20, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime, etc. and for one year and two years of suspended execution. On January 5, 2011, the Defendant was released on March 30, 2012 while serving in prison by being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime, etc. in the same court, and was released on March 30, 2012.

5. 31. The parole period expired.

On October 23, 2012, at around 01:50, the Defendant driven a Cchip car with a blood alcohol content of about 0.096% while under the influence of alcohol from around 7km to around 7km of the Seo-gu Incheon Seo-dong, Seo-gu, Incheon to the roads in the vicinity of the State Station located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the accused in the first protocol of trial;

1. The circumstantial report of an employee;

1. Inquiry into the result of the crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous records: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records and investigation reports (Attachment to the same type of judgment, etc.);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the facts of crime, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment under Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes is that the defendant has been led to the confession of the crime of this case, but the defendant has been punished several times prior to the crime of this case. In particular, the crime of this case was committed during the period of repeated crimes due to the same kind of crime, the distance of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case is not shorter than the distance, and the defendant's failure to appear on the sentencing date while being tried in a state of non-detention and delayed trial for several months, etc., it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant in light of the above facts.

In addition, the sentence was determined by comprehensively taking into account all the sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.