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

On June 10, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million by the Ulsan District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On July 24, 2020, at around 22:50, the Defendant driven a DNA car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 3.7km from the front of the “C” restaurant located in Ulsan Nam-gu B to the lower part of the Taecheon-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, to the Taecheon-do, Taecheon-do, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol by 0.070% of blood alcohol concentration.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

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

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, etc., investigation reports, and investigation reports (verification of the same type of power);

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

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

1. Probation, community service order and order to attend the course of the punishment under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act are to be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the accused has led to the instant crime and has been repented; (b) the accused has a record of drinking driving twice; and (c) the accused has a record of blood alcohol concentration and alcohol level; (d) the distance and age of drinking alcohol driving; (e) the age; (e) character and conduct; (e) the motive, means and consequence of the offense;