A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On March 14, 2011, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Goyang Branch of the Jung-gu District Court on March 14, 201, and on December 18, 2013, issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for the same crime at the Seoul Western District Court on December 18, 2013.

On July 5, 2014, around 22:57, the Defendant driven B-mati cargo vehicles under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.055% at the section of about 15 K K m in the direction of the 15 K-ro, Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul to the end of the calendar-ro 170 and the end of the back of the Goyang-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking-driving and the circumstantial statement of the drinking-driving driver;

1. Records before judgment: Criminal records, etc. inquiry reports, investigation reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing summary orders;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (i.e., that a person does not drive under the influence of alcohol in the future as he/she repents wrongs);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Taking into account the same circumstances as the above);

1. In light of the fact that the defendant, who has been punished twice due to the driving under the influence of alcohol for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, was engaged in driving under the influence of alcohol for the reason of sentencing, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by taking into consideration the following circumstances: although the liability for the crime is not minor, the defendant's mistake is recognized and contradictory; there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine; the fact that the driving of this case does not cause any traffic accident due to the driving of this case; and the fact that the driving of this