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 August 29, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Incheon District Court, and on July 1, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime at the same court.

On December 3, 2017, at around 22:50, the Defendant driven a B-crin car under the influence of alcohol content of about 20km from the front of the 15-12th road in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Yeonsu-do to the front of the street in Gyeonggi-do, Gyeonggi-do.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of driving at least twice under the influence of alcohol, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of a driver who is placed in driving and notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and an investigation report (report attached to a summary order of the same criminal record as the suspect) statute;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of punishment for a crime, and the selection of imprisonment;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

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. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the sentencing conditions shown in the trial process of this case, including the character, conduct, family relation, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, shall be determined as ordered in full view of the following circumstances.

A. The favorable normal defendant appears to have led to the confession of a crime and reflect his/her mistake.

A defendant has no record of having been sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment.

B. Unfavorable normal Defendant committed the instant crime even though he had been punished twice due to drinking driving, and again committed the instant crime.

The number of the defendant's drinking alcohol reaches a considerable degree.