A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

On November 6, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Southern District Court of the Jeonju on the grounds of the violation of the Road Traffic Act. On April 14, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for the same crime by the same court. On October 26, 2012, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for the same crime by the same court.

At around 18:30 on May 11, 2015, the Defendant driven C Non-Stop car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.198% at a 7km section of the 7km-dong, Sinwon-si, Geumwon-si, Sinwon-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written proposal from an employer and a circumstantial report from an employer;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports and investigation reports (attached to the same type of criminal records and summary orders, etc.);

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 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation ( Taking into account the favorable conditions of sentencing among the following reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following factors are repeatedly taken into account for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc., despite having had a record of punishment for the same kind of crime, the Defendant again committed a second offense. The Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration is very high at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol in the instant case, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the facts that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, that the defendant supported the mother of 87 years old, that the community residents of the defendant want to take a preference against the defendant into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, and all other sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case shall be determined like the order, taking into account all of the sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case.

It is so ordered as per Disposition for the reasons above.