A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On July 23, 2012, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 5 million for a fine of KRW 5 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Daejeon District Court’s Support for Incheon District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

As above, the Defendant, despite the fact that he violated Article 44(1) or (2) of the Road Traffic Act, once again, in violation of this provision, driven a motor vehicle of fa-purged lurg with a blood alcohol content of about 0.191% under the influence of alcohol level 0.191% from the 4km section to the front road located in D in the same city at the Asan-si B apartment Cdong parking lot around August 7, 2020.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. 112 reported case handling table;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of the criminal history records, investigation reports (Attachment to the summary order of the same kind of power), and copies of the summary order issued approximately 2012 high-level and approximately 4124, to the Acts and subordinate statutes;

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;

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

3. Grounds for sentencing Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than two years but not more than five years;

2. Non-application of the sentencing criteria: The offense of violation of the Road Traffic Act as stated in the judgment is not prepared in the sentencing criteria.

3. The decision-making driving of a sentence is a crime which may bring the life of a person as well as his own, and is highly dangerous.

As stated in the ruling, the Defendant is punished as a drinking driving, but he is re-driving, and the responsibility for such crime is not less complicated.

The blood alcohol concentration is also very high.

However, the defendant seems to have led to confession and reflect on the crime of this case.

There is no power of punishment heavier than a fine.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background leading to the crime, method and attitude of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, etc. are shown in the arguments in this case.