A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On December 21, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 4 million for the same crime in the same court on July 21, 2017, and was sentenced to a penalty of KRW 4 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act on at least two occasions.

On February 6, 2018, the Defendant driven a C K5 vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of 0.136% while under the influence of alcohol while driving a motor vehicle at approximately 50 meters from the front of the postal concentration station located in U.S. Dong-dong, U.S. to the front road of the election management committee located in U.S. 24, U.S.-dong, U.S.-dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking alcohol, statement of the situation of the driver of drinking alcohol and report on the situation of the driver of drinking alcohol;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (verification of the same kind of force);

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense; Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving)

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order of Education and the Order of Community Service is that the defendant had been punished twice due to the crime of drinking driving, but again committed the crime of this case is disadvantageous.

However, it is against the defendant's wrong recognition and the defendant has no record of punishment heavier than the suspended sentence due to the same crime, taking into account other favorable circumstances, and taking into account all factors of sentencing as shown in the argument of the present case, such as the distance of drinking driving, interval between past drinking driving and the crime of this case, the time and interval between past drinking driving and the crime of this case, the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence is determined as