A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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 January 3, 2011, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 as a fine for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on January 3, 201. On August 18, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 4,00,000 for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on August 18, 2013. On April 25, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of KRW 10,00,000 for a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on March 24, 2015.

Although the Defendant had violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol content of 08:50 on May 28, 2017 at a 0.097% from the roads of Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu to the front roads of Yongsan-gu, Seoul, while driving a FH car at approximately 300 meters from the roads of Yongsan-gu to the front roads of Yongsan-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking and a statement in the circumstances of the driver of drinking;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiry letters, inquiry reports (fixtures of relevant written judgments) and statutes;

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the grounds of the imposition of orders to provide community service and attend lectures is that a person's physical ability affects so that a person is driving a drinking, which is highly likely to lead to traffic accidents, as well as the risk of repeating a crime. The Defendant, like the previous conviction stated in the judgment, once sentenced to punishment four times due to drinking such as suspended sentence, once again driving a drinking without any particular warning, and the Defendant's degree of driving a drinking again is disadvantageous.

However, the defendant is unable to repeat the crime of this case as he reflects his depth, and the defendant drinks his drinking.