Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

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

On June 7, 2010, the Defendant: (a) driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with 0.078% a alcohol level of 0.07% on October 18, 2010; (b) was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 for a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daejeon District Court on October 18, 2010; (c) on February 7, 2016, while driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with 0.122% a alcohol level of KRW 00,000,000 for the same crime, and was issued a summary order of KRW 4 million by the same court.

(2016 Highest 396) On December 6, 2019, the Defendant driven Cinep Passenger Vehicles while under the influence of alcohol with a degree of 0.119% alcohol concentration on the front side of the Yancheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Vehicle blackbox records and video data CDs;

1. Criminal records as indicated: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports, and 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. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and the main sentence of Article 59(1) of the Act on Probation, etc. is one of the important factors to increase the risk of traffic accidents, and thus, the frequency of accidents is high, which may cause a huge threat to not only drinking drivers themselves but also other people's lives, bodies, etc., and social damage caused by drunk driving is increased. Therefore, it is necessary to impose strict liability on drinking drivers.

As seen earlier, the Defendant committed the instant crime by running a drunk driving twice and being punished as a fine, even though he had the record of being punished as a fine.

In particular, the Defendant had done the front vehicle normally as a result of the instant crime.