A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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

On September 2, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of seven million won due to a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving) in the Seog branch of the Daegu District Court on September 2, 2008, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for eight months on July 23, 2013.

Although the Defendant had been punished for drinking driving two or more times as above, on August 2, 2017, the Defendant driven BNA car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.145% from the 200m section of alcohol level to the road front of the bank that was 126 new bank, from the Do near the Yeng-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-ro, Seoul-ro, to the same direction, around August 22:28.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking, statement of the situation of the driver driving, and inquiry about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking;

1. Making teas;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A) and Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (verification of the same criminal history of suspect);

1. The provision of Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime under the relevant provision of the Act;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence is that if the defendant was punished as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and the defendant again commits a second offense despite being punished, and the defendant has a high level of receiving drinking, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, in light of all the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant's mistake recognized and against himself/herself, the defendant complained against him/her only once, that the defendant's person desires to take the defendant's wife against the defendant, and that there is no criminal history after the 2013 year prior to and after the judgment of the defendant, the defendant shall be sentenced as the disposition.