A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that 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 May 18, 2009, the Defendant issued, at the Changwon District Court, a summary order of KRW 1 million for a fine of KRW 7 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, at the same court on December 7, 2009, a fine of KRW 2.5 million for the same crime, and on November 15, 2010, a fine of KRW 3 million for the same crime, etc. at the same court on the same date.

On July 11, 2016, at around 23:00, the Defendant driven C rocketing car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 300 meters alcohol concentration of 0.091% from the 300-meter section to the front road of the diesel village 7nd apartment complex in the same Dong, which was located in the same Dong.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of the regulation of drinking drivers, report on the situation of drinking drivers, inquiry into the results of the regulation of drinking driving, and notification of the completion of correction;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports and investigation reports (a copy of summary order of the same kind of suspect's power attached);

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances shall be considered for the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had the record of being sentenced to a fine as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, such as the criminal facts stated in the judgment, is the reason for sentencing unfavorable to the Defendant.

However, it is advantageous to the fact that the defendant would not drive under the influence of alcohol again in the future, that the blood alcohol concentration at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case remains at the level of license suspension, and that there is no criminal history other than the criminal records stated in the judgment.