A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] The Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 as a crime of violating road traffic law at the resident support of the Daegu District Court on September 25, 2006 and KRW 1,00,000 as a fine for the same crime at the Chuncheon District Court on May 13, 2013.

[2] On September 9, 2017, the Defendant driven a BS 5 car under the influence of alcohol leveling to approximately 0.09% of alcohol leveling from around 700 meters away from the front of the bank located in Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Seo-gu, Incheon, to the front road of the Cheongra Women Hospital located in 602, as Seo-gu, Seo-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the circumstances of driving at home and a report on the circumstances of the driver at home;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A) and Acts and subordinate statutes on investigation reports;

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 Defendant, with the reason for sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, once driving alcohol again, even though he had a record of criminal punishment three times due to drinking driving, including the previous conviction in the judgment.

Although the drinking volume of the defendant is light, this does not apply.

Considering the social risk of drinking driving, the responsibility of the accused for the crime cannot be deemed to be light.

However, the defendant shows that the defendant recognized the crime in this court, and shows a strong reflectivity.

The defendant shows his intention not to drive drinking any more than after registering the cancellation of the running car.

In the same way, the driving of the defendant's drinking did not cause personal and material damage.

The defendant shall be subject to criminal punishment in addition to criminal records resulting from driving three times of drinking.