A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On November 4, 2014, the Defendant issued a summary order of one million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Suwon District Court on March 14, 2018, a summary order of four million won by a fine at the Suwon District Court on March 14, 2018, and on October 16, 2018, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of one million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Suwon District Court on October 24, 2018, and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 24, 2018.

Nevertheless, at around 04:45 on June 27, 2020, the Defendant driven an E-7 car under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.129% in the 1km section from the front of the road located in Ssung City B to D front roads.

As a result, the defendant, even though he had been punished for a drunk driving, has re-driving and violated it more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Two copies of criminal records, summary order, one written judgment, one copy of the summary judgment, and one copy of the agreement of the case and other Acts and subordinate statutes apply;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the Defendant, as stated in the judgment of the court below, had a record of multiple times of punishment, such as a suspended sentence once, due to drinking driving, re-driving during the suspended period.

In addition, traffic accidents have occurred, and in light of the contents of traffic accidents, it is judged that the risk of drunk driving has significantly increased, and it has left the site without any particular measure after the traffic accident.

In light of the above circumstances, even if the most favorable circumstances asserted by the defendant and his defense counsel are considered, it is necessary to keep the defendant from drinking, and keep the defendant from drinking for a considerable period of time, and have the time of serious resistance.