A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On August 25, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court, and on December 4, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Dong branch of the Busan District Court.

[2017 Highest 136] On December 24, 2016, the Defendant driven CA car at a distance of about 1.5 km from the front of the Aardo restaurant in Busan-gu Busan-gu Busan-dong to the front road of the international white apartment located in the same Gu, while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.092% among the blood transfusion around 05:10 on December 24, 2016.

As a result, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving regulations twice and drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

[2017 Highest 481] On October 30, 2016, the Defendant driven a Cingcon vehicle with a alcohol content of about 0.092% while under the influence of alcohol at about 2 km from around 23:50 around 30, 2016 to around 663, as in the same Gu.

As a result, the defendant had been punished for drinking more than twice, but he again driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement on the circumstances of the driver at each driving school;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: The application of inquiry statements, investigation reports (formers and confirmations) and statutes, such as criminal history;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of punishment for a crime;

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

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount of punishment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da11448, Apr. 1, 201);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (resumed grounds for reduction of amount);