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

On October 24, 2013, at around 22:15, the Defendant driven a car in the column C in the state of alcohol alcohol 0.292% under the influence of alcohol on the section of approximately 1km from the front of the Kannam City to the fourth distance from the Gannam-dong in the same city.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on detection of the driver (investigative records 44 pages) and response to requests for blood appraisal; and

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written circumstantial statements of a host driver;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (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 (Article 53 and 55(1)3 of the same Act (Article 55(1)3 of the same Act, even though the case was not less than that of the Defendant’s injury in light of the fact that the drinking water was considerably high at the time of the instant crime, and the occurrence of traffic accidents beyond the central line, there was no personal injury other than the Defendant’s injury. Considering that the Defendant was a primary offender who

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Discretionary Reasons for Discretionary Mitigation);

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation and Order to Attend Courses;