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

On February 9, 2017, around 05:35, the Defendant driven B-low-income vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.120% in a 3km section from the front of the NC department store to the front of the route in the same Gu-dong located in the same Gu-dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking, a statement on the circumstances of the driver of drinking, and a report on the detection of the driver;

1. Written consent to blood gathering, request for appraisal of alcohol concentration in blood, and application of the request response statutes;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. On July 6, 2002, the Defendant: (a) received a summary order of KRW 500,000,000 from the Daegu District Court and the Busan District Court issued a fine of KRW 3 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the course of violating the Road Traffic Act; (b) on October 22, 2013, even though the Defendant again received a summary order of KRW 3 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Busan District Court, it is necessary to punish the Defendant with strict punishment in consideration of the above.

However, considering the fact that the defendant reflects his mistake, the fact that there are no other criminal records except for the above two previous fines, and other factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the age, sex, environment, circumstances of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment as shown in the text shall be determined.