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

On May 20, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 by the Daegu District Court as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On January 17, 2020, the Defendant driven an ES125U Mababa, while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.031% of blood alcohol level at approximately 900 meters from the roads near the Seo-gu, Daegu-gu B market to the roads for the building of D located in the same Gu C.

Accordingly, the defendant, even though he violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act at least once, was driving under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigation report (Report on the status of an employee);

1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and the statement of the situation of drinking drivers;

1. Criminal records as indicated in the judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports (A) and Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (verification of the same criminal records as the suspect);

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution is that the defendant has been punished by a fine at least three times for drunk driving (the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, which has been punished by a fine in 199 and 2000, is likely to be caused by drunk driving, is likely to be caused by the same kind of crime even if he/she had a record of being punished by a fine, and it is necessary to strictly punish the

However, it appears that the defendant was aware of the fact that he committed the crime, and the blood alcohol level of the defendant at the time of this case is relatively low to 0.031%, etc. in favor of the defendant, considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant. In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, home environment, circumstances after the crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, family environment