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 March 28, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Daejeon District Court Seosan Branch on March 28, 2007, and a summary order of KRW 4 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the same court on March 27, 2014.

【Criminal Facts】 On March 2, 2019, at around 00:12, the Defendant driven a fluent car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 1k from the section of approximately 0.186% under the influence of alcohol from the front of the C funeral hall located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si to the roads adjacent to D apartment E-dong.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who was under the influence of alcohol not less than twice, driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of drinking control;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (verification of previous records of the same kind), application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

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 punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, criminal records, circumstances after committing the crime, etc., which are deemed to exist three times in the previous sentence, the blood alcohol content is deemed to be against the defendant's mistake, the fact that there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine, the fact that the defendant supports the children aged 17 years old due to negligence.