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

At the Daegu District Court on January 28, 2008, the defendant has been notified of a summary order of a fine of two million won due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On December 25, 2019, at approximately 05:05, the Defendant driven a CTB car under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.122% in the five-meter section of the front road of Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu. B.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the state of drinking drivers, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, replys to criminal records, application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the prosecution investigation report (verification of the same criminal records as the suspect);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Although Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution has three times the history of punishing drunk driving for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution, the execution of a sentence shall be suspended by taking into account the Defendant’s age and occupation, etc., and the risk of recidivism should not be imposed on probation, etc. on the following grounds: (a) the current Road Traffic Act, in which the regulatory standard and statutory punishment were greatly strengthened following the implementation of the Road Traffic Act; and (b) the degree of blood alcohol concentration exceeds the criteria for the revocation of license; (c) the punishment is not easy to take into account the fact that the number of blood alcohol concentration exceeds the criteria for the revocation of license; (d) there are circumstances that make it difficult to see the short distance in the parking lot for the rearrangement of parking after returning the vehicle through acting driving; (e) the vehicle is disposed of to avoid repeating; and (e) considering the Defendant’s age and occupation, etc., the risk of recidivism in light of the aforementioned driving circumstances.