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

On January 26, 2012, the Defendant issued a summary order of a fine of three million won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Daegu District Court on January 26, 2012, and on April 4, 2013, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act by being sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for the same crime in October of 2013.

On 04:00 on 23, 2016, the Defendant driven a C Blue-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-dong

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Before ruling: References to criminal records, two copies of summary order, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of one written judgment;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

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, such as the age, character and conduct, family relation, family relationship, home environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, shall be determined by taking into account the following circumstances, such as the order of education and the order of community service.

Unfavorable circumstances: The defendant has a record of being punished for drinking driving on a multiple occasions, and the above punishment records include a suspended sentence sentenced in 2013, but also committed this case.

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