A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year and six months from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On January 19, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of a fine of two million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Ulsan District Court, and on October 13, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of a fine of two million won for the same crime from the Busan District Court to a summary order of a fine of two million won or more due to drinking driving on at least two occasions.

On May 29, 2017, the Defendant driven B Rad Cargo Vehicles with approximately 150 meters alcohol concentration 0.107% while under the influence of alcohol level 0.107% at a section of about 150 meters from the front of the Busan National University located in Geum-gu Busan National University to the front of the Southern High School located in the same Dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of the driver involved in driving, response to a request for appraisal, report on the detection of the driver involved in driving, and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking driving (net 11);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A) and Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (previous convictions);

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (referring to driving under influence of alcohol) applicable to the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment for imprisonment, and the choice of punishment;

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. The fact that there are five previous convictions in violation of road traffic laws due to driving without a license or driving of drinking, including the previous convictions indicated in the judgment of the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and the extent of the defendant's driving at the time of the instant case is relatively significant: Provided, That the defendant's driving is contrary to the erroneous recognition of the error, the defendant's previous convictions are limited to the defendant, the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant and the conditions of the sentencing specified in the trial process shall be determined