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

[criminal history] On November 3, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of road traffic law in the Gwangju District Court's support on November 3, 2006, and a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime in the same court on March 12, 2008. On March 26, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for six months for the same crime, etc.

[Criminal facts] On November 23, 2015, the Defendant driven B Poter truck under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.156% from a 1km section to a middle school located in the same Eup’s comprehensive playground path from the Do in front of the Seocho-gu, Jinjin-gun, Gangnam-gu, Jinjin-gun, Seoul, at around 21:04, to the middle school located in the same Eup’s sports path.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Statement report on the situation of the driver at driving, notification of the results of crackdown on drinking driving, investigation report (to hear, etc. statements by reference D phone);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (the confirmation, etc. of such previous history);

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. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the following grounds for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act requires a corresponding punishment in light of the fact that the defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had a record of punishment for the same kind of crime several times.

However, the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, including those favorable to the Defendant, such as the Defendant’s acknowledgement of the Defendant’s mistake and the fact that there was no record of having been sentenced to punishment, etc., shall be imposed the same sentence as the disposition.