However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On August 14, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 from the Ulsan District Court to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on October 15, 2014, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million for the same crime in the same court.

On January 30, 2019, the Defendant driven the ETS125 Orba while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.153% in the section of approximately 300 meters in front of “D” located in the same Gu in Ulsan-gu B, Ulsan-gu.

Therefore, although the defendant had been punished for drinking driving more than twice, he driven a motor vehicle under the influence of re-driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the drinking driving control, and the report on the actual state of drinking drivers;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records and summary order statutes;

1. Relevant 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 for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and the facts charged are recognized and reflected, and the fact that the person drives a stobane at a lower level is the circumstances to be considered for the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that blood alcohol concentration is high, that there is a criminal record for the same kind of crime, and that there is a sudden accident is disadvantageous to the defendant.

Other factors of sentencing, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, motive for crime, etc. of the defendant, shall be determined as per the order.