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

[2014 Highest 1614] On May 3, 2015, the Defendant driven a Cystren motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of 0.078% while under the influence of alcohol, without obtaining a driver’s license in approximately 500 meters from the front of a mutually aesthetic restaurant in Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon to the front of a modern apartment located in the same Dong-dong.

[2014 Highest 2880]

1. On May 3, 2014, at around 22:34, 2014, the Defendant was required to comply with a transport survey by a slope D belonging to the transportation survey team of the Daejeon Middle Police Station near the foregoing Hyundai apartment, to measure alcohol by a respiratory measuring instrument, and was measured at 0.078% of blood alcohol concentration, and was required to present a license from the above D for identification.

Accordingly, the Defendant stated that he was “E” who was the subject of criminal disposition due to drunk driving, and expressed his resident registration number to the above D with the intent of avoiding criminal disposition.

After that, on May 8, 2014, the Defendant received an examination as Defendant status from the Daejeon District Police Station guard and the traffic investigation team office in the Daejeon District Police Station in the Daejeon-dong 496-1, Daejeon-dong, and conducted the said examination, and the Defendant committed the “E” as above.

While the Defendant had been driving at “E” as above, the Defendant filed an application with the said F to electronically process the foregoing drinking-driving case in accordance with the “Act on the Use, etc. of Electronic Documents in the Summary Procedure” and requested the said F to sign the “Electronic Processing Consent” column. At the time, the Defendant: (a) was in a state where he completed a course of study by cutting off the so-called arms, and thus, the Defendant changed his signature on behalf of the said F; and (b) the Defendant had the said F F, who is aware of it for the purpose of exercising his digital signature even if the fact is not “E”, instead of signing the “E” on the electronic signature tag.

The Defendant continued to undergo the Defendant’s investigation against the F, and had F with a view to exercising the said investigation for the foregoing reasons.