However, the execution of the above punishment for three years from the date of the final judgment.

[criminal power] On August 22, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million from the Gwangju District Court to a fine of KRW 1 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on October 11, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Chungcheong District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

On September 7, 2020, at around 00:19, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle with eurine 0.121% alcohol level in the section of approximately 2 km from around the main point of “C” located in Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, to the front road of the Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si.

As a result, the defendant was driving under drinking in violation of the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Investigation report of the defendant's legal statement, the oral statement of his/her driver, the report of his/her circumstantial statement (report on the circumstances of his/her drinking driver)

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, investigation reports, and Acts and subordinate 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 (Consideration of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing below);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Reexamination of favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing following the suspended sentence);

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures was that the Defendant was subject to criminal punishment twice due to drunk driving.

Considering the circumstances of drinking driving at the time, degree of drinking driving, and the fact that the accident was caused while driving under the influence of alcohol at the time, the quality of the crime is not good.

The defendant shows his attitude to recognize and reflect his mistake in this court.

The defendant was not subject to criminal punishment exceeding a fine.

In addition, in consideration of the defendant's age, living environment, the time interval between the crime of drinking alcohol driving and the crime of drinking alcohol driving in this case, attitude after the crime, and various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, the punishment as ordered shall be determined.