The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

1. The 8-month imprisonment sentenced by the original court on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. As stated in the judgment of the court below, it cannot be denied that the defendant needs to give more severe warning to the defendant when considering the fact that he/she drives a vehicle in a state of drinking which is not less less than 0.104% of alcohol level during the period of suspension of his/her previous drinking driving, even though he/she had been subject to three times punishment due to drinking driving since 2007, due to his/her previous conviction.

However, considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant's wrong recognition and reflective attitude, the distance of operation is not remote, the defendant was not sentenced to a sentence, there is no particular criminal history other than traffic-related crimes since 2000, and the fact that the defendant was detained and seems to be fully aware of the importance of the case after being sentenced to a sentence in the court below, and the circumstances such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, home environment, and criminal history, the punishment sentenced in the court below is too heavy.

The decision is judged.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the judgment below is ruled as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of facts and evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 201Do1146, Apr. 1, 201);