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

On November 16, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Daegu District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

At around 01:50 on August 14, 2019, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle Esp-type from the front of the “C” restaurant located in Daegu Jung-gu, Daegu-gu, to the lower end of the D at the same time at approximately 600 meters under the influence of alcohol level of 0.059%.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the state of drinking drivers, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, replys to criminal records, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to prosecution investigation reports (Attachment to the same type of crime records, etc.);

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Probation Criminal Act include two times the criminal history of punishment for drunk driving, and the probation is imposed, considering the fact that there is no imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment, the blood alcohol concentration level of the defendant falls short of the criteria for revocation of license, and the defendant's age and occupation, etc. to ensure that the execution of the sentence is suspended, but it seems that the strict management and supervision of the probation officer will be helpful to prevent recidivism. It is so decided as per Disposition on the above grounds.