It should read 0.96 ‰ for clairty I think.
@paparomeodelta you say this in your post:
"[...]he was not posing a threat to the passengers, disregarding the fact that he was on his way to start flying after exterior controls of the ac."
But the article says this:
"
Det står, enligt Attunda tingsrätt, klart att mannen var för berusad för att få flyga planet. Men för att kunna fällas krävs, utöver överskriden promillehalt, också att han utförde en uppgift ”av väsentlig betydelse för flygsäkerheten”.
Om han hade påbörjat säkerhetsinspektionen hade han fällts för flygfylleri, enligt rätten. Han har dock själv uppgett att han bara gick ut för att han såg poliserna komma."
Which translated would be:
According to the court of Attund it is clear that the man was to intoxicated to fly the plane. But to be convicted he had to, apart from being over the legal limit, have performed a task "of significant importance to flying/air security".
Had he started the security inspection he had been convicted for drunk flying (
my own translation 
), said the court. But he himself stated that he only went out because he saw the police approaching."
My point being that it seems he had not actually begun the external inspection, or atleast that it's not proven he had. Therefore he isn't convicted, had he done so he had been found guilty.
And since he's lost his job for breaking SAS rules and has had his certificate revoked I don't think we'll find him flying regardless, which I suppose is just as well...