A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On February 14, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of one million won or more due to a crime of violating road traffic laws at the Daegu District Court on February 14, 2007, and on March 3, 2009, the Defendant was issued a fine of two million won or more due to a crime of violating road traffic laws in the Western Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court.

Nevertheless, on April 17, 2017, the Defendant driven B (9.8c) Oralba under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.126% of alcohol level while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.126% without obtaining a motor device bicycle license from approximately 200 meters away from the Home Mart, 2017 to the street in front of the same Eup market in the same Eup.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Detailed statement reports on drivers of drinking alcohol and inquiry of the results of crackdown on drinking alcohol driving (record 11 pages);

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment to the same criminal record and summary order);

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 154 subparagraph 2 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) of the relevant Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62(1) of the Suspension of Execution Act provides that the Defendant’s responsibility is not provided for in the light of the fact that he/she drives in a drinking state even though he/she has been punished several times due to drinking alcohol for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act. However, the Defendant’s responsibility is not provided for in the light of the fact that he/she is in profoundly against his/her mistake, that he/she has no record of punishment exceeding a fine, including the record of driving alcohol