A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

[criminal history] On May 30, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2,50,000 to a fine for a violation of road traffic law at a common military court of the 50 association of the Army on May 30, 2016, and on September 10, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2,00,000 as a crime of violation of road traffic law at a common military court of the 50 association of the army on September

[2] On April 19, 2018, around 03:43, the Defendant driven B vehicles under the influence of alcohol content of 0.140% in the blood without the driver’s license, on the road before the 447-1 diversary heading in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seongdong-dong, Gangdong-gu, Seoul, for approximately three kilometers from the road before the 447-1 diversary heading in the Sungdong-dong, Songpa-gu, Songpa-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. 112 A list of reported cases;

1. Four copies of the control site photograph; and

1. Previous conviction: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of inquiry about criminal history;

1. Article 148-2 subparag. 1, Article 44 subparag. 1, Article 152 subparag. 1, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act applicable to the criminal facts of which the “Article 152 subparag. 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act” is omitted. However, in the case where any clerical error is omitted in the written indictment in the applicable law, it appears to be obvious clerical error or omission in light of the facts charged, which is within the scope recognized as identical to the facts charged, and where any clerical error is omitted in the written indictment, the court may ex officio apply a different provision from the written indictment to the extent that it does not put any substantial disadvantage to the defense of the defendant (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do12372, Nov. 12, 2015, etc.).

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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. In full view of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order and other circumstances of sentencing indicated in the records, the sentence shall be determined as ordered.

Since 2015, the defendant is a defendant.