A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

[criminal history] On November 27, 2006, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Dong branch of the Busan District Court, and a summary order of KRW 5 million for the same crime at the Seoul Central District Court on May 6, 201, respectively.

[2] On November 25, 2020, around 00:17, the Defendant driven BMW car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 0.086% alcohol concentration in blood at the section of approximately 2.1km, from the front of the exit 7mn Station in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, to the front of the exit 11mn Station in Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu to the front of the exit 402 as Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. The criminal defendant's legal statement statement, the investigation report and the control report (the situation report of the driver in charge);

1. Records of crime: Application of an inquiry letter, investigation report (the same kind of force), relevant list of cases, and summary order and text of an order, such as criminal history;

1. Article 148-2 (1) and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense; Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to reduce the amount of selective punishment for imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. In consideration of the fact that the defendant's reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, such as protection observation and attendance order, repeats driving of drinking (in addition to the criminal records stated in the judgment, there are the records of punishment for driving of drinking more than twice, in addition to the criminal records stated in the judgment) the defendant repeats driving of drinking, there is a need to supervise the defendant not to drive drinking;

(b) order particular observation of protection.

The fact that the drinking volume of this case is significant and that there is a power that caused an accident due to the driving of drinking, etc. is not followed by an accident due to the circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, and the previous driving of drinking prior to ten years, and the previous driving of drinking is more severe than the fine due to the previous driving of drinking.