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

On December 19, 2006, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol of 0.064% on a blood alcohol level, and received a summary order of KRW 700,000,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Young-dong Branch of the Young-gu District Court on February 2, 2007. On September 30, 2015, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol of 0.15% on a blood alcohol level, and received a summary order of KRW 4 million as a fine for the same crime at the same court on October 14, 2015.

On May 18, 2020, at around 18:30, the Defendant driven an E passenger vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.117% at the section of about 2 km from the upper end of C to the front end of D in the Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

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. The circumstantial statement statement and investigation report of the employer (the circumstantial report of the employer-employed driver);

1. Criminal records in judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, and summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

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 reason for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and the main sentence of Article 59(1) of the Act on Probation, etc. is one of the important factors to increase the risk of traffic accidents, and thus, the frequency of accidents is high, which may cause a huge threat to not only drinking drivers themselves but also other people's lives, bodies, etc., and social damage caused by drunk driving is increased. Therefore, it is necessary to impose strict liability on drinking drivers.

As seen earlier, the Defendant committed the instant crime by running a drunk driving twice and being punished as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act on several occasions, even though he had the history of punishment for violating the Road Traffic Act, and committed the instant crime.

In particular, the defendant is driving a motor vehicle while driving the motor vehicle.