A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On March 10, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 500,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Northern District Court on March 10, 201, a summary order of KRW 5 million as a fine for the same crime at the Seoul Central District Court on March 16, 2010, and a summary order of KRW 7 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Northern District Court on May 8, 2014.

On February 8, 2020, the Defendant, at around 22:35, operated a clater’s car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.122% at the 4km section from the front of the Seoul Metropolitan Government Office to the front of the Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office, and violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. On the written report on the legal statement of the defendant, the driver who has made his oral statement, and the control of drinking operation;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, amounts of dispositions and results confirmation reports;

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. The reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation reflects the defendant's wrongness, and the surrounding people want to repeatedly take the measures.

However, in 2004, although the defendant had a record of having been sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for causing a traffic accident while driving under the influence of alcohol and causing another person's injury, the same punishment power has reached four times in total after driving under the influence of alcohol.

In the case of repeated re-offending, the person has been sentenced to a fine, and re-driving again, and the drinking volume in this case is relatively high.

Since it is judged that the use of the defendant is no longer permissible, the defendant shall be punished in the same sentence as the order by taking into account various factors of sentencing.