A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On May 30, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 5,00,000 won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daegu District Court on May 30, 2007. On March 29, 2011, the same court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years on October 201, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 29, 201, and is currently under the grace period.

On February 1, 2013, at around 11:00, the Defendant driven a eFal or other car while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.109% from the section of about 10km from the street in front of the new restaurant in the Geumdong-gu, Gyeongdong-gu, Gyeongdong-gu, Gyeongdong-gu to the 101-dong parking lot of approximately 10km.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on actions taken against an employer, and report on the status of the employer-employed driver;

1. Previous records: Application of the Act and subordinate statutes to refer to inquiries, such as criminal records, and investigation reports (attached reporting, such as summary orders);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation has the career of being punished five times for traffic crimes, and among them, the number of times the defendant was punished for driving the same vehicle as the instant vehicle and driving without obtaining a license, and the defendant committed the instant crime even though he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Daegu District Court on March 29, 201, even though he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court on March 29, 2011, and the defendant committed the instant crime during the suspended sentence period of two years, and the blood alcohol concentration of the Defendant at the time of the instant case was not low.

However, considering the fact that the defendant is in profoundly against his/her own mistake, etc. as favorable circumstances to the defendant, various circumstances, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive, means and result of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered as conditions for sentencing as shown in the argument of this case