A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

1. On May 8, 2015, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) and the Act on Guarantee of Compensation for Motor Vehicle Damages, while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.083% at around 21:30 on May 8, 2015, the Defendant driven a CNV car that is not covered by a mandatory insurance policy of approximately 8 km from the front day of the headline of the “flick ray” on the front day of the front day of the headline to the front day of the same page.

2. When the Defendant, at the time and place specified in paragraph 1, discovered the fact that he was aware of the fact that he was a drinking driver to E in the course of the expressway patrol zone D zone, the Defendant was aware of the fact that he was the type F of the Defendant for the purpose of avoiding the revocation of the license due to driving under drinking, while driving as if the Defendant was F in order to avoid the revocation of the license due to driving under drinking, and measured the drinking value of the driver’s identification report presented by E in the column of the driver’

“F” in the driver’s name column, the statement is written as “F”, “F” in the name column, “G” in the resident registration number column, and “F” in the statement. The statement is written as “F”, “G” in the name column, and “F” in the written request for the transfer of the case, and written as “F”, “F”, “resident registration number column,” and “F” in the above written request for the transfer of the case, and marks the Defendant’s personal seal on the name of F in the written request for the transfer of the case, respectively.

As a result, the Defendant, for the purpose of uttering, forged each of the following: (a) the part in the name F of the report on detection of the driver at the State, which is a private document related to the verification of facts; and (b) one of the F’s written statements and one of the written requests for the transfer of the case; and (c) the Defendant, as if he were a document duly formed, exercised each of the following: (a) the report on detection of the driver at the State, a written statement and the written

3. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in paragraph 2, is driving in F, as stated in paragraph 2, on a personal portable information terminal (PDA).