2. Provided, That the above sentence shall be executed for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

On August 29, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million for the violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Sung-nam Branch of Suwon District Court.

On August 29, 2020, at around 01:20, the Defendant driven B k7 car under the influence of alcohol content of approximately 0.194% while under the influence of alcohol at approximately 3km from the 3km section to the vicinity of the chike road, which is linked to the chike-dong in Sejong Pchina.

Accordingly, the defendant was punished for drunk driving, but he violated it again more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Investigation report (report on the circumstances of an immigration driver);

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal history records, probationary records, report on the results of confirmation of the previous disposition, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes (20160602);

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendant’s blood alcohol content was higher than 0.194% at the time of committing the instant crime on the grounds of the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act with regard to probation, community service, and order to attend lectures, and the Defendant was higher than that at the time of crackdown.

Nevertheless, the defendant was driving a motor vehicle, and the driver stopped the motor vehicle on the road and opened a door of the driver's seat on the floor and controlled another motor vehicle traveling along the above road by reporting it to the police. Thus, it is reasonable that the defendant's crime of this case may infringe on the safety of life and body of an unspecified number of people walking along the road.

Therefore, the illegality of the crime of this case is serious.

In addition, the defendant has committed the crime of this case even though he had been punished due to drinking driving as shown in the previous judgment, which is likely to be criticized.