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.

[criminal history] On September 20, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2.5 million from the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court on September 20, 2007 due to a violation of road traffic law (driving), and a summary order of KRW 3.5 million from the same court on January 29, 2009 due to a violation of road traffic law (driving).

[Criminal facts] On May 12, 2018, the Defendant driven the Bwning-III truck with approximately 4km alcohol level of about 0.275% under the influence of alcohol level from the section of about 4km from the front of the restaurant located in the Seogsan-si Eup/Myeon, Seosan-si to the road in front of the same side of the 371-1.

As a result, the Defendant violated the prohibition on drinking at least twice, and drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Report on the result of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (the previous confirmation of such past history);

1. Relevant Article of the Act and 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 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 53 and 55(1)3 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200

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 reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act include: (a) the Defendant, having been already punished three times due to drinking alcohol driving, once again drives drinking; (b) the unfavorable circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant had a high alcohol level among the blood transfusion of this case; and (c) the fact that the Defendant’s mistake reflects the Defendant’s wrong and thus does not repeat again; and (d) other favorable factors such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime; and (e) the circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered in the instant argument shall be determined by comprehensively taking account of the various factors