A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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

On October 12, 2009, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Southern District Court, and a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for the same crime at the Incheon District Court on February 14, 201.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol content 0.085% among the blood transfusion around January 2, 2017, driven B Costex vehicles at around 01:085%, and proceeded with approximately 10km section from the vicinity of the Incheon Seo-gu Office in Seo-gu Incheon, Seocheon-gu, Incheon to the roads in front of Seocheon-gu, Incheon Island.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of driving at least twice under the influence of alcohol, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

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

1. Previous convictions: References to inquiries, investigation reports (Attachment to summary orders), and copies of summary orders attached thereto; and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes applicable thereto;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (the fact that his/her mistake is repented, etc.) of the mitigated amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following extenuating circumstances in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of the Order to Attend the School, and Article 62-2(1) of the Road Traffic Act, even though the Defendant committed several offenses, which were committed in violation of the Road Traffic Act, despite the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime under the influence of alcohol, and even though there were several times of violations of the Road Traffic Act, the nature of the relevant crime was inferior, but the amount of alcohol concentration in the blood was not relatively high, the violation of other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes does not reach the point of violating other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes, and the fact that the Defendant did not repeat the offense, such as the late-time one's mistake, selling of the vehicle in possession, etc.,