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

On May 18, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Changwon District Court's branch on May 18, 2007, and on August 4, 2008, at the Changwon District Court issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).

Despite the fact that the Defendant had been punished twice or more for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, at around 19:50 on September 5, 2015, the Defendant driven a B-hand car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 500 meters from the front road of the Gu Gohap-gun Gyeongcheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-do to the front road of the Hocheon-gun Park Construction site located in the same Gohap-do, the Defendant driven a car while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.234% from the 50-meter section to the front road of the Hocheon-gun Park Construction site located in the same military.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the status of a drinking driver, report on the status of a drinking driver, report on the status of a drinking driver, and report on the status of a drinking driver, and inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking;

1. Written response to the request for appraisal;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, investigation reports (former records and attachment reports of judgment) and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following consideration shall be made again for the reason of sentencing);

1. Considering the fact that the defendant had already been punished several times due to drinking driving, and that the drinking alcohol level is very high even though he/she had already been punished several times, there is a need to strictly punish the defendant.

However, considering the fact that the defendant reflects his mistake and repents, there is no previous conviction or more than a suspended sentence due to the same kind of crime, the past record of drinking driving by the defendant is relatively long time, and the defendant seems to have disposed of the vehicle used by him.