A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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 February 25, 2009, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Seoul Central District Court. On June 20, 201, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Seoul Central District Court.

On September 23, 2017, the Defendant driven a B car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 0.152% of alcohol concentration at a distance of about 10km at the front of the convenience store located in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Do, with a petition located in the Dong-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Incheon to the front of the convenience store.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Fact-finding reports on drivers of drinking alcohol and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking alcohol;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, a summary order, and the application of the text of the judgment;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

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. Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the Act on Road Traffic for the Reasons of Sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act provides that the punishment standards for driving under drinking shall be differentiated depending on the frequency of driving under drinking with the intention of making a light for driving under the influence of alcohol, which provides that a person who violates the prohibition provisions for driving under drinking again two times or more shall be punished for driving under drinking again. A person who has been punished twice or more as stated in the judgment of the defendant was punished for driving under drinking twice or more as stated in the judgment of the defendant. A person who was punished for refusing to measure drinking in 2013 but was punished for driving under the influence of alcohol without the warning of the danger of drinking, and the degree of driving under the general standards of the defendant's driving under the influence of drinking is disadvantageous.

However, the defendant does not commit a second offense against the crime of this case, and the defendant is the defendant.