A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On November 14, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 as a fine for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Incheon District Court, and on May 3, 2010, the Seoul Southern District Court issued a summary order of KRW 2,50,000 as a fine for the same crime.

Although the Defendant had had a history of driving alcohol twice or more as above, on February 14, 2017, the Defendant driven B Aridi A4 car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.081% in blood at around 00:05 on February 14, 2017, and proceeded with approximately 100 meters from the roads of Ari-ri-ri-ri-dong in Gangnam-gu, Seoul to the roads of 650 meters in the same field.

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, reports on investigation, and copies of summary order attached thereto;

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 Course is that: (a) even though there were several times of offenses violating the Road Traffic Act, including the same kind of criminal records, the Defendant committed the instant crime under the influence of drinking, and the nature of such offense is not less than that of the instant crime; (b) however, the Defendant initially moved the meeting place through a substitute driver after drinking alcohol, but he was able to easily move a substitute driver to another place; (c) the degree of alcohol concentration in blood was relatively lower; (d) the distance was relatively short; (e) the Defendant did not reach a violation of other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes; and (e) later, he was erroneous.