A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 13, 2012, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million for a crime of violating road traffic law (drinking) from the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court on April 13, 2012, and a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime from the Daejeon District Court Branch of the Daejeon District Court on February 8, 2010.

[2] On July 12, 2017, at around 04:04, the Defendant driven Cuba vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.146% at a section of approximately 500 meters from the front of the 3 Dong Office, Masan-dong, Masan-si, Masan-si, Masan-si, to the end of the end of the end of the same 500 meters following the new elementary school of the same Dong.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking at least twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witnessD 1, the investigation report, and the statement of the situation of the driver who is the main driver;

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. A previous conviction: He asserts that a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, etc., and a report of investigation (a) [Attachment of a summary order attached thereto] [the defendant forced the police to search the defendant's house without a warrant at the time and forced to measure drinking, so the result of drinking collected as above is inadmissible as evidence of unlawful collection.

However, in light of the statements of D, the police at the time, and the situation at the time, ① the police officer is recognized to have searched the defendant’s house under the understanding of the mother-child E, who is a person with the right to residence and has the right to consent to the search. As such, the above search is lawful as a voluntary investigation (E submitted a written statement to the effect that the police entered the fake house without his understanding, but it is difficult to believe it in light of the witness’s statement, the relationship between the defendant and E). ② In addition, even in the course of the drinking test, the police officer was merely aware of the fact that the defendant consented to the drinking measurement and required the alcohol measurement by the police to force the defendant to conduct

§ 23.