A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On August 22, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Jeonju District Court on March 28, 2007, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (dacting driving) at the Jeonju District Court on March 28, 2007, and on April 19, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (dacting driving) at the wooden Branch Branch of the Gwangju District Court on April 19, 201. On July 30, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 7 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (dacting driving

On November 11, 2016, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.198 percent from blood alcohol level around 23:15, driven B Poter truck within a three-meter radius from the front day of the “afterward food,” which is located in Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-si to the road 667-2, Yellowsan-si, Kim Jong-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Written appraisal of alcohol concentration in the blood;

1. Previous conviction in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and a report of investigation (report attached to a summary order) by the relevant Act on the facts constituting an offense subject to the application of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act selective punishment, and selection of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of weight is that the defendant was punished six times in the past by a fine due to drinking or refusing to take a measurement of drinking, etc., and the defendant was punished by a suspended sentence once due to a non-licenseing driving. Nevertheless, the driving of the motor vehicle in the state of drinking at the time of driving in the second-lane road in this case is found to have been caught in the state of driving in the second-lane road: Provided, That the defendant is against the depth of the mistake, and other consideration such as family relations;