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 April 4, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Seoul Northern District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million, and on April 21, 2010, a summary order of KRW 2 million from the Seoul Northern District Court to a fine of KRW 2 million for the same crime.

On November 24, 2014, around 19:50 on the same day from the roads near the Giso Station in Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Defendant driven B-Scar car in the state of under the influence of alcohol of about 8 0.165% in blood alcohol concentration from around 20:05 on the same day to the front road of the Gisodong-dong 330-1, Jungdong-dong, Jung-gu, Seoul.

As a result, the defendant was punished for the violation of the Road Traffic Act at least twice, and was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Control note and investigation report (written statement by a reporter);

1. Report on the statement of the status of a drinking driver, and report on detection of a drinking driver;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the first head of the judgment below), including the record of the crime in the first head of the judgment, was sentenced to five times a fine due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act due to a drunk driving since 1999, and in 2003, the defendant was sentenced to two years a suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment and was sentenced to two years a suspended sentence, and he was engaged in multiple drunk driving without being aware of the fact that the defendant was sentenced to two years a suspended sentence, and the drinking level was very high.

However, it is wrong that the defendant is guilty of the crime, and will not drive the vehicle again due to the disposal of the vehicle in this case.