A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 August 28, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 4 million at Suwon District Court for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving). On April 14, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by the same court as the same crime.

【Criminal Facts】

On July 22:25, 2019, the Defendant driven a E-high typ vehicle while under the influence of alcohol of about 3K at a distance of about 0.056%, from around the wife B to the front road located in the same Gu C, from around 3Km to D in the same Gu.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the regulations prohibiting drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Whether the results of the drinking driving control and the results of the drinking measurement are printed out;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports (verification of suspect-like records);

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 sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant committed a second offense despite the fact that the defendant had been punished twice due to drunk driving, etc. is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant reflects the crime, the criminal record of the above drunk driving is the criminal record of a fine, and there is no other special criminal record except, and the degree of blood alcohol in this case is low, it is judged that the sentence of the defendant's sentence is harsh.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the records of the instant case including the above circumstances, it is so decided as per Disposition.