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 25, 2004, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on March 26, 2010, a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime at the Seoul East East District Court on March 26, 2010, and a summary order of KRW 5 million for the same crime at the Seoul East District Court on September 21, 2012, respectively.

On August 23, 2014, at around 10:46, the Defendant driven a bpool clock in the state of alcohol of about 0.108% of blood alcohol concentration on the front of a restaurant where it is impossible to identify the name near the village hotel in Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul, but from around 4 kilometers of approximately 207 to the road in the same Sungcheon-ro, 207.

Accordingly, the Defendant again driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, as a person who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Report on the state of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the state of a drinking driver, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking under the influence of alcohol;

1. Previous records: The application of criminal records, inquiry and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on Probation is that the Defendant is not aware of the fact that he was punished three times by a fine due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act, such as the first head of the judgment, and that he was engaged in driving under the influence of alcohol at the same time, and that he was relatively high in blood alcohol level, and thus, the quality of the offense of the Defendant is not weak.

However, the fact that the defendant committed a criminal offense and repents his/her wrong mistake, does not exceed the fine, and for the last two years.