A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two 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

[Criminal Power] On June 25, 2018, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 5 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Incheon District Court’s Busan District Court’s Vice-Support.

【Criminal Facts】

On May 15, 2020, at around 04:13, the Defendant driven a C rink (K3) car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.161% at around 3.6 km from the road near the water operation area in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-si, Sungnam-si to the road in front of the building in Sungnam-si, and violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the situation of a drinking driver, and on the site photograph reported as a result of the drinking driving control;

1. Previous records: Application of inquiry reports and investigation reports, including criminal records, and 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;

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

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

1. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstances of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and other various conditions of sentencing as shown in the oral proceedings.

The defendant had a record of being punished as a drunk driving, but again committed the crime of drinking driving in this case.

The defendant was unable to properly operate a steering gear due to the driving of a bridge, resulting in the defendant's driver's damage to a bridge rail outside the above road zone of the bridge and falling into the tent below the bridge.

In this case, even though it did not lead to an accident of human life, one might lead to a harsh loss of human life if there was a person who passed from the accident time.

As seen in this case, the Defendant’s drinking value measured after the accident is high.