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 February 21, 2011, the Defendant received a summary order of a fine of three million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Changwon District Court on February 21, 201, and received a summary order of five million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Changwon District Court on September 12, 201, and received a fine of five million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Changwon District Court on September 12, 201, respectively.

On May 6, 2016, at around 05:40, the Defendant driven B rocketing car under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.171% in the front of “GS25 merchant south Market” located in the same 21-1 on the roads in front of “heac shop” located in Seongbuk-gu, Sungwon-dong 18-9, Sungwon-gu, Sungwon-si.

As a result, the defendant was a person who had driven at least twice and driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the state of drinking drivers, inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving, and notification of the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (examination of suspect records and copies of summary orders);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The defendant of the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is the reason for sentencing unfavorable to the defendant, despite the fact that he/she again committed the instant crime even though he/she had the record of being sentenced to a fine twice as well as the record of being sentenced to a fine for violating the Road Traffic Act, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment of the court below.

However, it is found that the defendant does not drive a motor vehicle again, and that the defendant is discovered in the course of moving the motor vehicle in the parking lot so that he/she can easily find a driver on his/her behalf.