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

On December 31, 2012, the Defendant received a summary order of a fine of KRW 3 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Daejeon District Court Redsung branch on December 31, 2012.

1. Around 01:00 on June 28, 2019, the Defendant driven a ewing-III motor vehicle with a blood alcohol content of about 0.081% from the 15km section from the front of the “C” road located in Seocheon-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do to the front road of the west-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

2. Around 01:00 on June 28, 2019, the Defendant intrusiond the victim’s residence by opening the entrance door of the victim and opening the door to the inner door without the victim’s permission, even though it was late at night, at the latest, and without the victim’s permission.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The statement of each police officer made to F and G;

1. Notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Investigation report (Evidence No. 7), investigation report (Ctv analysis);

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a copy of summary order, criminal history records, and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 319 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigations under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act.

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( repeatedly taking into account the favorable circumstances that are considered as the reasons for sentencing as follows);

1. Probation and community service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act include: (a) the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Act is considerable; (b) the distance of drunk driving is not available from the victim of his/her residence intrusion; and (c) a number of recommended drunk driving offenses and violent criminal records

This is against this, the fact that there is no accident due to drinking driving, and the damage of residential intrusion is relatively minor.