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

1. The Defendant is a person who has received a summary order of a fine of KRW 4 million at the Seoul Southern District Court on July 9, 2010 due to the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

On April 1, 2020, at around 01:10, the Defendant driven D D general car freight cars while under the influence of alcohol leveling of about 0.193% at the section of about 10km from the front of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul to the front of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

2. No owner of any motor vehicle violating the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall operate any motor vehicle on a road unless mandatory insurance is subscribed;

Nevertheless, on April 1, 2020, the Defendant, as a holder of DD general car and freight cars, operated the said car on the road, which was not covered by mandatory insurance before Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C, around 01:10.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of control, and statement on the result of the drinking driving control;

1. Investigation report (as to the revision of the result of the control of sound driving)

1. Mandatory insurance policies;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, investigation reports, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose a sentence, Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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, even though the Defendant had been punished twice due to drinking alcohol driving, the instant drinking driving was conducted at the same time, and the blood alcohol concentration level at the time of the instant case is very high.

In addition, the defendant's age, attitude, environment, details and distance of driving, and after committing the crime.