A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On February 19, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 500,000 from the Suwon District Court to a fine of KRW 500,00 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on July 18, 2013, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

Despite the fact that the Defendant violated the foregoing provision on the prohibition of drinking driving, the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle of e-hurged E-hurged under the influence of alcohol content of about 1 0.183% while under the influence of alcohol with a 0.183% alcohol content in the direction of 0.20% from the street in the vicinity of Suwon-gu Suwon-si Btel to the street in front of the D cafeteria located in the same Gu C.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written report from an employer to the driver;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, investigation report, notification of the results of the control of drinking driving, etc.;

1. Records of judgment: The references to criminal records, references to criminal records, reports on the results of confirmation before and after each disposition, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing summary orders;

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

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant, who has a record of drinking driving, drives a motor vehicle again, and the crime of this case is not less than that of the crime, but the amount of blood alcohol concentration due to drinking of this case is higher.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, the 2009 period of drinking driving of the defendant has passed since the date of the crime of this case, and the defendant has no record of crime other than the above 2 times of fine, and the sentencing shown in the records, such as age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and result, etc.