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 October 30, 2006, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2.5 million from the Gwangju District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and a fine of KRW 3 million from the Gwangju District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving on May 8, 2009).

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a B-to-car.

On November 12, 2014, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol with 0.163% of alcohol concentration on blood around 22:10 on November 12, 2014, driven approximately 10m price on the road after a small fire fighting box in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement on the circumstances of the driver, report on the detection of the driver, and report on the driver;

1. Previous records: Application of criminal records, etc. and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration shall be made again for the reason of sentencing);

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Probation Act, and Article 62-2 of the Act on Probation, etc., have the record of being punished twice due to drinking driving as shown in the judgment of the defendant, and further, around 2010 and around 2013, the defendant should be subject to strict punishment in light of the fact that he/she had a record of being punished for driving without a license even though he/she had a record of being punished for driving without license, and that he/she driven a motor vehicle in the state of drinking alcohol concentration of 0.163%.

However, the fact that the defendant's mistake is divided and reflects that he would not repeat the same crime again, that the defendant's distance of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case does not exceed 10 meters, that the defendant seems to have economic difficulty while supporting his spouse and four-month child, and that there is any other reason.