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.

On March 5, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court, and on August 31, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2 years of suspended execution.

Although the Defendant had been punished twice or more due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking) as above, the Defendant driven Bing MK car with approximately 0.173% alcohol concentration in the section of about 300 meters from the parking lot of the Sojog-gun, Seoul, to the national highways of about 300 meters in the same Ri, around October 16, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking and the statement in the circumstances of the driver;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiry letter, investigation report (formers and attachment of judgment) and statutes, such as criminal history;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the following grounds for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order has the history of having been punished twice due to drinking driving. Among them, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant, since he/she again committed the instant crime, even though he/she had been under suspension of the execution of imprisonment due to the occurrence of an accident resulting in an injury to the victims during drinking driving.

However, in consideration of the fact that the defendant reflects his mistake and does not repeat the crime, and that the past record of drinking driving has passed relatively much time, the sentence of the same punishment as the order shall be imposed.