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

Although the Defendant was sentenced to each fine due to the violation of Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act in violation of the Road Traffic Act on March 11, 2007 and October 27, 2009, the Defendant is not likely to suffer a substantial disadvantage to the Defendant’s exercise of his/her right to defense, even if he/she recognizes that he/she was sentenced to the fine due to the violation of Article 44 (1)

On March 1, 2013, at around 03:45, CK7 cars were driven at approximately 3 km section in front of the front power of the members, who are located in the Dong-dong where they are living in the state of alcohol of 0.171% at the time of their stay in the front of the Dong-dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Copies of the report on detection of the driver and circumstantial statements;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the summary order and criminal history records;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime;

1. Determination of punishment in this case requires an accident due to driving under the influence of alcohol, and the degree of blood alcohol concentration is high, thus, choice of imprisonment is subject to imprisonment;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1548, Apr. 2, 2006)

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (In addition to the aforementioned circumstances, considering the age and depth of the defendant in light of the aforementioned circumstances);

1. Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act to provide community service or attend lectures;