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

On August 29, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Daejeon District Court on August 29, 2008, and on September 6, 2012, the same court received a summary order of KRW 2 million as a fine for the same crime.

On August 4, 2020, at around 23:25, the Defendant driven a vehicle of 3 km away from the parking lot of Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon to the front road located in Daejeon Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu to the 0.068% alcohol level.

As a result, the Defendant violated the regulations on the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Place of the offender, arrest report on occurrence of the case, report on the circumstantial statement of the drinking driver, investigation report, notification of the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, inquiry into the results thereof, and list of reported cases 112;

1. The register of driver's licenses, and making inquiries into the car register;

1. Photographs related to the control site;

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

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( considered as follows in favor of the accused);

1. The dangers and harm of drunk driving under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act are heavy, and the defendant is under the influence of alcohol;

The danger of breaking up the vehicle to the Indian block and divinging down the vehicle might have been caused to the road as long as the driver who has passed over the delivery might have been able to cause the accident, the driving distance is long, and the responsibility for the crime is heavy, and the power punished for the same kind of crime is highly likely to be subject to criticism twice, etc., but the defendant is recognized as disadvantageous to the defendant, but there was no accident, and there was no criminal history exceeding the fine, and there was no social relation, such as supporting his spouse and minor children.