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 September 17, 2009, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Incheon District Court, and a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime at the same court on August 2, 2013.

Nevertheless, on June 3, 2016, the Defendant driven a D-hand car with alcohol content of 0.109% in the influence of alcohol during blood at around 23:12, and proceeded with a section of about 500 meters in the front of the East-gu Incheon Metropolitan Government from the unfluoral road located in the Tandong-gu, Nam-gu, Incheon to 450 square meters in the middle-gu, Incheon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions: References to inquiries, investigation reports (reports attached to the summary order of the same kind of suspect), and copies of the summary order attached thereto; and

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (the fact that his/her mistake is repented, etc.) of the mitigated amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following extenuating circumstances in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of the Order to Attend the School, even though there were a number of criminal records of the same kind of crime, which violated the Road Traffic Act, and even though they were under the influence of alcohol, the crime of this case is not good. However, while the defendant was under contact with the wife where he was under the influence of alcohol, he was under the contact with the wife where he was under the influence of alcohol, and the defendant was under the influence of returning urgently, he did not reach a violation of other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes, the defendant did not lead to a violation of other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes, the defendant must support the wife and children who was under the side's birth, the mother of the sick who was under the influence of his own disease, and then did not repeat the crime, such as selling the vehicle.