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 March 14, 2016, the Defendant driven a B car under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.050% in the blood alcohol content from around 1 km section to the roads in front of the Dok-scam cafeteria located in the Priju-si, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Busan, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Pyeong-gu.

As a result, the defendant was punished for driving under drinking more than twice, but he was also driving under drinking.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on driving alcohol;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of the summary order appended to inquiries about criminal history and investigation reports;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) (Selection of Imprisonment) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the Defendant, even though he/she had a record of driving drinking twice, was driving at once without any special reason.

However, while the defendant intends to start a new life with his wife, he shows his attitude to reflect the crime of this case.

In addition to the above points, the sentencing conditions, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, and circumstances after the crime, shall be considered, and the sentence shall be determined as per the order.