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

On January 30, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million by the Jeju District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a fine of KRW 4 million by the same court on January 9, 2014, respectively.

On June 15, 2018, around 19:53 on June 15, 2018, the Defendant driven a FM5 car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.190% from the 1km section to the e-road located in Seopopo City D from the front of the C convenience store in Seopopo City B.

Accordingly, the defendant, even though he violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice, was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the situation of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the control of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the results of the control of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the status of a driver under the influence of alcohol, investigation report (report on the status of a driver under the influence of alcohol), inquiry into the results of

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Criminal records, replys on criminal records, each inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving, investigation reports (report attached to summary orders on the previous records of a suspect), and application of a copy of the summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 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 (The following conditions shall be considered in light of the favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the community service order is that the defendant has two criminal records of the same kind, and that the degree of his/her taking is grave, etc. are disadvantageous.

However, there are favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant recognizes the facts charged and seriously reflects the facts charged, and that the distance of driving is very long.

In addition, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, means and results of crimes, and the circumstances after crimes, etc. shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the various sentencing conditions shown in the trial process of this case.

[Sentencing Criteria] - Sentencing Criteria are set.