A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On September 16, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court, and on September 28, 2009, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime, etc. at the same court on September 28, 2009, and on September 20, 201, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime at the same court on September 20, 201, and on December 22, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for the same crime at the Changwon District Court on June.

On January 22, 2014, at around 21:18, the Defendant driven a spke car under the influence of alcohol of approximately 0.104% in a section of approximately 300 meters of blood alcohol content from the front day of the frequency at which it is impossible to identify the trade name in the Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. No. 2-4 of the evidence list submitted by the prosecutor (hereinafter “Evidence List”).

1. Previous convictions in judgment: the application of the Acts and subordinate statutes No. 8,10 of evidence list;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen (see, e.g., previous conviction);

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the Defendant recognized and seriously reflects his or her mistake, but there is a history of being punished four times for the same crime, and one month has not passed since the period of probation expires due to the same crime, and it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant to imprisonment with prison labor, in that it repeats the instant crime.

In addition, the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, shall be determined as ordered by taking into consideration the various circumstances.