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

【The Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million on November 14, 2006, on the grounds of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), etc. on April 14, 2007, on the support of Sungnam-gu, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 5 million on September 9, 2013 by the same court as a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) and the said summary order became final and conclusive on November 7, 2013.

【Criminal facts” around July 28, 2018, around 23:40, the Defendant driven a B rocketing car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.277% during blood while under the influence of alcohol, from the border distance in the vicinity of 141 to the front road of the real estate located in the 161st session of the same year.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. A report or investigation report on the detection of a driver at the main place (the application of the aforementioned dmark formula);

1. Previous conviction: Inquiry about criminal history and application of the Acts and subordinate statutes reporting criminal history;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (referring to driving under influence of alcohol) applicable to the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment for imprisonment, and the choice of punishment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act was that the Defendant driven a motor vehicle in a state of exploitation, which far exceeds the revocation level of driver’s license, and caused an incidental traffic accident.

The defendant who has already been punished by the same criminal records and three times for the same offense shall be punished by imprisonment.

However, there are circumstances such as the fact that the accident caused by the defendant's driving under drinking caused minor damage to the human being, the physical traffic accident was not caused due to the purchase of a comprehensive insurance policy, the representative engineer's care in a place where the defendant has changed his/her name, the reason for considering the circumstances of driving is that the defendant has been driving, the fact that the defendant, such as his/her parents and children, has family members who should support himself/herself, and the defendant is divided, against his/her mistake.