A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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 March 14, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 from the Incheon District Court to a fine of KRW 10,000 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 2 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on November 18, 201.

【Criminal Facts】

On February 16, 2019, at around 00:30 on February 16, 2019, the Defendant driven a DNA A7 car under the influence of alcohol level of approximately 0.072% in the section of about 1.5 kilometers from 00:50 on the same day to 00:50 on the same day from the restaurant near C in the Subdivision-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Sungnam-si to the lower road.

As a result, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the situation of running a motor vehicle under consideration, and the statement on the state of standing of the motor vehicle under consideration;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (criminal records, etc.) and other 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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act: The circumstances favorable to the previous sentence, such as the statement in the judgment: The fact that the defendant's mistake appears to be against his own wrong, the fact that there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, circumstances of crimes, and circumstances after crimes, etc., shall be determined within the scope of discretionary mitigation, taking into account all the conditions for sentencing specified in the arguments in this case,