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 July 28, 2017, the Defendant driven B SL125U Austria under the influence of alcohol concentration of approximately 0.284% from a section of approximately 1 Km to a section of approximately 1 Km of 0.284% of the same Myeongririri 140-7, on the roads of Jinjin-si, Jin-si, Magjin-si, Magjin-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking and statement in the circumstances of the driver of drinking;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a criminal investigation report (No. 4 pages of evidence records);

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

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Attend a lecture or the Order of Community Service had a record of having been punished for the same crime, there is no unfavorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime again, and that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration is very high at the time of driving.

However, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant reflects the mistake, that the defendant is the driver of Oralba, that the defendant has no record of criminal records over the suspension of execution, and that there is no age, circumstances after the crime, etc.