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 November 30, 2015, around 02:12, the Defendant driven a hurd motor vehicle B, under the influence of alcohol content of approximately 0.107% in a 2km section from the front of the 1934 CU convenience store (a single point at each single point) to the front of the 3rd city of the same Eup/Myeon from the Do to the 1934 CU convenience store (a single point at each single point).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. The circumstantial report of the driver employed at the main place;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to notify the results of regulating drinking driving;

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

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act include only the records of having been punished several times for traffic crimes, such as drinking, etc., and the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he had been sentenced to imprisonment, is disadvantageous to the Defendant, and the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime and reflects the Defendant is favorable to the Defendant.

In addition to the above circumstances, all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case shall be determined as per the disposition.