1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months;

2.Provided, That the above sentence shall be executed for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] The defendant, at the Incheon District Court on February 19, 2008, issued a summary order of a fine of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving of Drinking), and the summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving of Drinking) on March 25, 201 and three times of the same power, including the defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving of Drinking) in the support of the Suwon Friwon

[Criminal facts]

1. On October 4, 2017, the Defendant was driving a CN city car under the influence of alcohol content of about 3 km from the restaurant of “nive fishing village,” located on the west 353-3, which was located on the west west west at around 19:10 on the same day to the road in front of the old salary tunnel, located on the 1018-2, which was located on the 19:10-2, in the case of the same day at around 19:10 on the same day.

2. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) is a person who is engaged in driving a car at the CN city.

On October 4, 2017, the Defendant driven the said car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.117% among blood transfusions on October 4, 2017, and proceeded on the two-lane road in front of the old salary tunnel, which is located in 1018-2 in the old salary tunnel at the time of globalization, at the speed of about 103km in the front of the old salary tunnel.

At the time, the night and the range of restriction is the left-hand side of 80 km speed, so in such a case, the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by complying with the restricted speed and driving safely.

Nevertheless, while neglecting this, the Defendant, as seen above, stated that the Defendant was negligent in driving in excess of a speed of 23 km as above, and the charge of driving along the vehicle in the front line is merely “in transit.” However, according to the Defendant’s vehicle cambling CD, the Defendant’s vehicle cambling in the front line at the two-lane of the first lane where the Defendant was driving.