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.

[criminal history] On October 31, 2014, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court, and on July 1, 2016, a summary order of KRW 2 million for the same crime at the same court.

[2] On July 17, 2016, Defendant 1, who had a drinking alcohol driving force twice or more as above, driven CMW car under the influence of alcohol level of about 15 km from July 17, 2016 to the south-gu U.S. Pluke road located in the Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Each report on internal investigation (No. 4,13 in the evidence list);

1. A previous conviction in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, a copy of a summary order, such as inquiry about criminal history;

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

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. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, including the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, family relation, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered in full view.

Unfavorable circumstances: The defendant committed the crime of this case even though he had the record of punishment for driving under drinking twice.

A favorable normal situation: The defendant does not again commit the same crime.

There are many things.