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

【Criminal Facts】

On September 9, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million by the Daegu District Court for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a fine of KRW 3.5 million by the same court on February 26, 2016.

【Criminal Facts】

On March 11, 2020, at around 00:30, the Defendant driven an E rocketing car with approximately KRW 550 meters alcohol concentration at a section of about 0.080 meters from the roads in front of the Daegu Northern-gu B market to the roads in front of the D Lebz Center in the same Gu C.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, and notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (the confirmation of the same type of criminal records);

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. 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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as the "justifiable circumstances") of the suspended sentence;

1. The sentencing criteria are not set for the crimes of this case to which the sentencing criteria are applied.

2. Determination of sentence: (a) comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, occupation, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the commission, circumstances after the commission of the commission of the commission, etc.; and (b) the conditions of various sentencing as shown in the argument of the instant case:

The defendant, even though he had a record of punishment for drunk driving, was driving under the influence of alcohol again after the enforcement of the current Road Traffic Act, which greatly strengthened the control standards and statutory penalty.

The defendant's blood alcohol concentration level is high to the criteria for revocation of license.

The favorable circumstances: The defendant is against the defendant, recognizing the crime of this case.

There is no criminal offense beyond the fine against the defendant.

The defendant.