A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 December 4, 2006, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Busan District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

On April 27, 2020, at around 11:45, the Defendant driven C Poter Cargo Vehicles with approximately 15 meters alcohol concentration 0.059% under the influence of alcohol at a section of about 15 meters from the parking lot in the Namnam-Gun B market to the entrance of the said B market.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) or (2) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, investigation report, notification on the results of the control of drinking driving, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of each of the criminal records, reference reports (A), investigation reports (verification of criminal records of the same kind as a suspect), and copies of summary orders, respectively;

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. The reason for sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the crime is not very high due to the act of spreading the risk of causing human life at any time, and the voice of our society demanding strong punishment is high.

The defendant is a person who has been punished for drinking twice in the past.

Nevertheless, the risk of drinking driving has not been broken down, and it has caused serious danger to the safety of the general public by driving under drinking again.

However, it appears that the defendant's wrong and repents the defendant, and even if so, the risk of the defendant has not been realized by a third party's life or body, considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

Other arguments in this case, such as the age, character, conduct and environment of the defendant, motive, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.