Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On October 31, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch on March 9, 2012, and a fine of KRW 3 million for the same crime from the same support on March 9, 2012, and on October 31, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for six months for the same crime in the same support on October 31, 2013, and was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for six months for the same crime on April 8, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

At around 03:20 on September 19, 2019, the Defendant driven an E rocketing car in the state of alcohol with approximately 50 meters alcohol concentration of 0.158% in blood, from the front of the indoor Packing car in Gumi-si B to the front of the D Agent in Gumi-si.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the duty of prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the state of driving under the influence of alcohol, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, investigation reports, and statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the probation, order to attend lectures or order to provide community service;

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Two to five years of imprisonment;

2. Application of the sentencing criteria: Not set;

3. In light of the fact that the Defendant has already been punished several times for the same kind of crime, and that the Defendant repeatedly commits a crime even though he has been sentenced to a prison sentence, and there was no urgent situation that the Defendant should have driven, the responsibility for the crime is very heavy, and there is a concern about the risk of recidivism.

However, there is a reason to consider the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime and seriously reflects the fact that the defendant disposes of the motor vehicle and does not drive the motor vehicle.