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

[Power of violation of Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act] The defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million at the Gwangju District Court on June 25, 2007 due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On April 6, 2020, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol around 23:26 on April 23, 2020, driven C C-W-man car from the front side of the Seo-gu Seo-gu Incheon apartment zone to the road inside the above apartment parking lot, with approximately 10 meters alcohol concentration of 0.114%.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

2. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act is a holder of C Czeman’s car.

The Defendant operated the car at the above time and at the same place, which was not covered by mandatory insurance.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements prepared in D;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Mandatory insurance policies;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a summary order;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of sound driving), Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (the point of operating automobiles not covered by mandatory insurance); Selection of each imprisonment term;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and the proviso of Article 50 and Article 42 of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances, etc. described in the following sentencing grounds):

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, and committed the instant crime again even though he was punished once due to drunk driving in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, and the Defendant was punished for various crimes including the traffic-related crimes, and the instant drinking water is also high. Therefore, the Defendant is sentenced to imprisonment.