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

The Defendant, at the Daegu District Court on April 9, 201, issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and received each notice of a summary order of KRW 6 million for the same crime from the Western District Court on June 24, 2015, and was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for the same crime at the Daegu District Court on May 26, 2016.

Although the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice, at around 01:10 on August 7, 2020, the Defendant driven a D EF rocketing car while under the influence of alcohol at approximately 0.170% of blood alcohol concentration from around 1km to the front road of C from the Daegu Suwon-gu Do around August 7, 2020.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the occurrence of traffic accidents in the police statement protocol to E, and the actual condition investigation report;

1. Report on the statement of the situation of a drinking driver, and inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking driving (Evidence records 17 pages);

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, references to criminal records, reports on investigation by the prosecution (applicable to the judgment of the same kind of force and summary order attached);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

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

1. Although the period of punishment for drinking or non-licensed driving under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of probation and lecture attendance order is ten times more severe (including one time of actual punishment and two times of suspended execution) and the social demand to eradicate the harmful effects of drinking driving, the traffic accident was caused again after the implementation of the current Road Traffic Act, which greatly strengthened the legal penalty, and the degree of blood alcohol level exceeds the revocation standard, and the degree of blood alcohol level exceeds the revocation standard, and seems to have driven a high level of drinking control at the new wall time, and the punishment should be chosen as it is necessary to seriously warn the risk of recidivism: Provided, That it is necessary to strictly warn the danger of recidivism, and the damage was recovered by the defendant, the defendant's blood pressure and urology, etc.