A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 January 21, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Chungcheong District Court's Chungcheong Branch on January 21, 2013, and a fine of KRW 8 million by the same court on July 29, 2015.

On October 31, 2018, at around 01:57, the Defendant driven a C low-speed car in the section of about 80 km from the front of the Chungcheong-si to the point of 349 km in the Central Highway, in the vicinity of the Crossing-gun, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol of 0.19%.

As a result, the defendant, even though he had a record of being punished for a drunk driving at least twice, once again passed a drunk driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking driving, and report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver;

1. Response to the request for appraisal;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports and investigation reports (attached to the same criminal records and summary orders) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on probation, community service order, and order to attend a lecture constitutes an act of enhancing traffic risks by driving under the influence of alcohol and under the influence of alcohol, and an offense that may cause substantial damage to not only himself/herself but also to other persons.

The fact that the defendant was punished by a fine for 2013 and 2015 due to drinking driving, and that the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant was very high to 0.169% and 0.252% at the time is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The fact that the defendant has no record of being sentenced to a suspended sentence or heavier due to drinking driving, and that all of the crimes of this case are led to confession and are against the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the age, character and conduct, the environment, the motive and background of the crime, the result of the crime, and the result after the crime.