A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On January 25, 201, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by the Ulsan District Court for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving), and a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by the same court on May 13, 2016, respectively.

[2] On March 16, 2018, the Defendant driven CK5 vehicles from the section of approximately 500 meters from the road in front of the water market in Ulsan-dong to the road in front of the night distance in the same Gu, under the influence of alcohol level of 0.130% among blood, around 22:14, 2018.

As a result, the Defendant, who committed a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at least twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement report and investigation report on the situation of the driver at the main place of business (report on the situation of the driver at the main place of business);

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on driving alcohol;

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Inquiry about criminal history, investigation report (the confirmation of the previous history), and copies of each summary order, shall be applied;

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

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “reasons for sentencing”), 53 and 55(1)3 of the Act on the Mitigation of Small Quantity, which are favorable to the Defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the conditions favorable to the above defendant shall be repeatedly considered);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Attend a lecture is that even though the defendant had been punished for driving two times of drinking, the crime of this case is low, the nature of the crime is not good, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration is high, and the liability for the crime is not less exceptionally in light of the frequency and contents of the same criminal records.

However, the defendant's mistake is recognized and is against depth, the distance of drinking driving is not relatively long, and it is not subject to punishment of fines twice due to drinking driving in 2011 and 2016.