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 August 21, 2007, the defendant issued a summary order of 2.5 million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving under the influence of sound), and on May 29, 2013 by the same court on May 29, 201, the same court has the record of being issued a summary order of 4 million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On May 28, 2016, at around 00:35, the Defendant driven a 50-meter BM passenger car at approximately 50 meters in front of the Paembow in the same Dong located in the Gaembang-dong, Kim Jong-gu, Kim Jong-si, while under the influence of alcohol by 0.141% of the blood alcohol concentration.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. On-going driving reports, reports on the state of his/her oral statement, and inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports (A) and 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. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances shall be considered for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The defendant of the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, as stated in the facts constituting the crime, committed the instant crime again despite the fact that he/she had been sentenced to a fine twice more than twice, as well as the record of having been sentenced to a fine for violating the Road Traffic Act, and the fact that the blood alcohol concentration level at the time of driving the instant case is very high is the reason for sentencing disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, there are other favorable reasons for sentencing, such as the fact that the defendant does not drive under the influence of alcohol again, the driving distance at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case is short, and the fact that the defendant has no record of being sentenced to suspended execution or higher, etc.