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

[criminal power] On January 19, 2010, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 700,000,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court, and a summary order of KRW 4 million as a fine in the same court on May 11, 2017.

【Criminal Facts】

On August 22, 2020, at around 20:20, the Defendant driven CM7 car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 2 km section from the front day of the mutual influence house in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, to the 863 sub-section in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, with a blood alcohol concentration of at least 0.087%.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, the report on the situation of a drinking driver, the investigation report (report on the situation of a drinking driving), and the inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous records: Criminal records, etc., and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiry reports and investigation reports (verification of the same kind of power);

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. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as “reasons for discretionary mitigation”), which is favorable to the defendant, is considered in light of circumstances favorable to the defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the repeated consideration of conditions favorable to the above defendant);

1. In addition, even though there was a history of punishment twice due to drinking driving prior to the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the Defendant committed the instant crime of drinking alcohol prior to the fact that the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration level at the time is considerable, and the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration level is not less and less minor, and that the distance that the Defendant tried to drive under the influence of alcohol considerably tension is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

The fact that the risk of traffic accidents has not been realized due to these crimes, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and is against the depth is favorable to the defendant.

Other records and pleadings, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, occupation, motive for the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.