A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On October 30, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2.5 million due to a violation of road traffic law (drinking), etc. in the Gyeyang-gu District Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's High Court's Order of KRW 2.5 million as a crime of violation of road traffic law (d

On December 19, 2015, at around 00:10, the Defendant driven a Clearning car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 100 meters alcohol concentration 0.083% from the blood alcohol concentration from around 16th to the roads in front of the city of Pakistan-Eup, Pakistan-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on internal investigation:

1. Inquiries about the results of regulating driving of drinking, reporting on the circumstances of driving of drinking, and notification of the results of regulating driving of drinking;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as inquiry, inquiry, investigation report (Attachment to the judgment, etc.), and judgment text;

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. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount (which has grounds to consider the commission of a crime)

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following sentencing conditions specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act shall be considered);

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of Order to Attend, is a person driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol content 0.083%, even though the defendant was punished twice due to the crime of drinking, and the defendant is under the influence of alcohol content 0.083%, and there is a need to punish the defendant with severe punishment in light of such risk.

However, the fact that the defendant recognizes the entire crime and reflects the fact that the alcohol concentration in blood cannot be seen as high (less than 0.1%). The defendant allowed the substitute engineer prior to the crime of this case to drive before the crime of this case, but the substitute engineer was aware that he/she was driving with his/her cell phone and was able to find it.