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

1. Around 21:02 on June 27, 2014, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol by 0.139% in blood alcohol concentration, the Defendant was driving Bho-G car at approximately 150 meters in a section of about 150 meters in front of the residents' center for defensive power in Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-ro, Ulsan-ro, Ulsan-ro, Ulsan-ro, Ulsan-dong, Defense bus stops.

2. At around 21:05 on June 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) on the street in front of the Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-ro 325 Anti-Defense Residents Center; (b) as a result of a drinking test, the Defendant: (c) requested the cancellation custodian of the driver’s license to collect blood from the control police officers, failing to comply with the foregoing measurement result; and (d) around 21:34 on the same day, the Defendant collected blood from the Defendant’s left-hand beer at the Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-dong, Ulsan-dong, U.S. University Hospital Emergency, Ulsan-dong, U.S. University Hospital; and (b) proposed the police officers to prepare and regulate control documents by arriving of the police officers’ surveillance failure; (c) opened the C traffic patrol back seat and brought about the Defendant’s blood collection.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. Report on the detection of a host driver and the circumstantial statement of a host driver;

1. Police seizure records;

1. Photographs of seized articles;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the facts of crime, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty, Article 329 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing [the scope of recommending punishment] of the punishment of the crimes of larceny against general property (the scope of punishment] under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act (the prosecutor stated in Article 48(1) of the Criminal Act to confiscate the evidence seized under subparagraph 1, but according to the list of seizure list, the owner under subparagraph 1 of the evidence shall not be subject to confiscation since he/she is the Republic of Korea).