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.

On July 6, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of two million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Busan District Court’s Branch Branch on July 6, 2010, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for the same crime at the Seoul Southern District Court on July 6, 2012.

Although the Defendant had had a history of driving alcohol twice or more as above, on December 4, 2017, while under the influence of 0.211% of alcohol concentration in blood around 19:15 on December 4, 2017, the Defendant driven the BM3 car and proceeded with a section of approximately 100 meters from the front of a mutually influent restaurant located in Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu to the front road of the 19:18th of the same day.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions: References to inquiries, investigation reports (verification of the history of drinking driving), judgment attached thereto, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a summary order;

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. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (the fact that his/her mistake is repented, etc.) of the mitigated amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following extenuating circumstances in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Social Service and Order to Attend the lecture are as follows: (a) although the Defendant had a large number of criminal records in violation of the Road Traffic Act, including three times of the same kind of crime, and even though there were many kinds of criminal records in violation of the Road Traffic Act, the driving distance was not relatively long; (b) the driving distance was not relatively long; (c) the Defendant’s mistake was divided later; and (d) all other circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, etc., are considered to determine the sentence as above.