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

On February 18, 2013, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Jeju District Court on February 18, 2013. On March 13, 2017, the Defendant was charged with the charge of violating the Road Traffic Act (drawing driving) (e.g., a summary order of KRW 4 million on May 16, 2017, which became final and conclusive on May 25, 2017). The Defendant committed two-time crimes of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) on April 25, 2017, without obtaining a driver’s license of a motor vehicle on April 25, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Fact-finding reports on drivers of drinking alcohol and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking alcohol;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, summary order, indictment, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes significantly true to this court;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1, Article 44 (1) (the point of drinking), Article 152 (1) 1, and Article 43 of the Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the grounds of protection and observation and order to attend lectures was already punished twice or by drinking. On February 2, 2017, the Defendant was already punished by driving a motor vehicle on the one’s own drinking on April 11, 2017, which was revoked by a motor vehicle driver’s license on the other’s driving on the one’s own drinking on the other, and was likely to be subject to criticism because the alcohol concentration in the blood during the instant drinking driving is very high.

In addition, various kinds of sentencing shown in the arguments of this case, such as the contents of punishment for the crime of drinking previously, the time of driving, the fact that there is no other record of crime, the age, sex, environment, circumstances after the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.