A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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 December 5, 2006, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Sungnam Branch of Suwon District Court on December 5, 2006, and on June 21, 2012, the same court was sentenced to a fine of KRW 6 million for the same crime.

【Criminal Facts】

On February 5, 2019, at around 22:38, the Defendant driven a D low-speed car at a section of about 2 km from the front side of Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-si to the front road of the same Gu, in a state of alcohol alcohol level of 0.074%.

As a result, the defendant has violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice and has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of drinking again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving under the influence of alcohol and the inspection results of the control of drinking driving;

1. On board, the register of driver's licenses, and mandatory insurance;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports;

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

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Consideration of favorable circumstances, etc. among the following reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of favorable circumstances, etc. among the reasons for sentencing following the suspended sentence);

1. The normal drinking operation disadvantageous to the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is not only a crime that may pose a danger to traffic order by itself, but also cause serious personal and material damage, such as the occurrence of traffic accidents.

As the statutory penalty for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) is recently raised and revised, there is a consensus on the necessity of strengthening the punishment for driving under the influence of alcohol.

Although the Defendant was punished twice by a fine due to drinking driving, the Defendant again committed the instant crime of drinking alcohol driving.

In favor of the favorable normal defendant, the defendant recognized his criminal liability, and shows the form of reflection.

at the time of crime.