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

[criminal history] On April 16, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Ulsan District Court, and on June 4, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million for the same crime from Jeju District Court, and has violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

[2] On January 28, 2016, the Defendant driven a B-wing truck at a section of about 500 meters from the distance of 500 meters to the roads near the Han River Port located in the same Eup/Myeon, where alcohol content is 0.060% under the influence of alcohol during blood transfusion.

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 driving alcohol;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of written inquiries about criminal history and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions and the choice of punishment for a crime: Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of imprisonment;

1. Reduction: Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following sentencing conditions specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act shall be considered);

1. Orders to observe protection and attend lectures: The punishment shall be determined as per the order, taking into account all of the following circumstances of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc.:

The favorable circumstances: The circumstances that are considered to be favorable to all facts of crime: although there was a history of punishment twice for the same kind of crime, it seems that the light of traffic-related crimes is considerably insufficient in light of the fact that the crime of this case was committed: The amount of alcohol concentration, driving distance, motive and circumstance of the crime, circumstances after the crime, occupation, age, and family relationship of the defendant. It is decided as per Disposition.