A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for nine 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

On June 8, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won due to a violation of road traffic law in support of the Sungnam-gu Friwon of Friwon, and on March 27, 2014, the Defendant was punished by driving a motor vehicle, etc. under the influence of alcohol on at least two occasions for six months after being sentenced to a suspension of execution on two or more occasions, due to a violation of road traffic law in support of Friwon Friwon Grinam-riwon of Friwon.

On April 21, 2018, at around 22:47, the Defendant driven a D-owned E-related cruise cruise car in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.14% from blood alcohol level from the container located in the air base located in 100 in the Orpo-si in Gwangju City to the 1.9 kilometer-ro 97 km-ro.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving a drinking and notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions: The application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, each disposition, previous convictions and results confirmations, to reported statutes;

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 to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The order of education and the order of community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, even though the defendant had two times the criminal records of the same kind, including the suspension of execution, driving drinking again, although the defendant had two times the reasons for sentencing: Provided, That the punishment shall be determined as ordered by taking into account all the factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, including the fact that the defendant is against the mistake, and the degree of alcohol concentration