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

In the Western Branch of the Daegu District Court on December 22, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2 million from a fine of KRW 4 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act on March 18, 2014, a summary order of KRW 4 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act on March 18, 2014, and a penalty of KRW 7 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act on March 30, 2015.

Although the Defendant had been able to violate the provision prohibiting drunk driving under the Road Traffic Act more than once, at around 13:10 on October 18, 2019, the Defendant driven a f G80-car under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.228% from the 10-meter section to the front road of the E- pharmacy located in D from the Do in Daegu hydro-gu B. < Amended by Act No. 1583, Oct. 18, 2019>

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. Report on the state of state of drinking drivers, and notification of the results of the regulation of drinking driving;

1. Photographs of an accident vehicle;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, replys to criminal records, application of Acts and subordinate statutes to prosecution investigation reports (power to punish sound driving);

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the Probation and Order to Attend Education has been four times or more, the current Road Traffic Act, which greatly strengthened the control standard and statutory punishment, causes traffic accidents by again driving under influence after the implementation of the Road Traffic Act, and the blood alcohol concentration level of the crime in the judgment was very high to 0.228%, and the first head's first head's three acts of the same kind of crime in the judgment, including the fact that the blood alcohol concentration level exceeds the criteria for revocation of license, and that it seems that driving under the highest control is likely to be high, and that the risk of repeating a crime is likely to be very high, a sentence of imprisonment shall be selected by requiring a severe warning: Provided, That there is no history of punishment heavier than imprisonment without prison labor or heavier for the same kind of crime in the previous case.