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 16, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million from the Incheon District Court to a fine of KRW 1 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and a summary order of KRW 1 million from the Daejeon District Court's Seosan Branch on September 18, 2008 to a fine of KRW 1 million for the same crime.

On June 19, 2016, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol at 0.116% of alcohol concentration, driven a chip car, and proceeded with a section of approximately 100 meters from the gold-free apartment parking lot located in 220 o, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, to the front road of the “bank youth” located in 250 o’t 250 roads from the gold-free apartment parking lot.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions: Inquiry letter, confirmation of the history of punishment for drunk driving, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the summary order attached thereto;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (the fact that he/she repents his/her mistake, etc.);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. are as follows: (a) although the Defendant had a large number of criminal records violating the Road Traffic Act, including the 4 times of the same kind of crime; (b) even though there are many kinds of criminal records violating the Road Traffic Act, it is very poor that the driving distance was relatively short; (c) the driving distance did not reach a relatively short violation of other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes; (d) the Defendant’s mistake was divided and sold the vehicle in possession, etc.; and (e) the Defendant did not repeat the crime, such as selling the vehicle, etc.; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, occupation, environment