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.

On September 2, 2015, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million due to a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), etc. from the Ulsan District Court.

On November 10, 2020, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, such as driving a vehicle of soflurged C in front of the site of the construction in Gyeyang-gu B at the Goyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 10, 2020, and being divingd from the driver’s seat as it was, while driving a vehicle of soflurd C at the center. Upon receipt of the report 112, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time from the slope E belonging to the Goyang-gu Police Station D, etc. called the Defendant’s face, with reding

There are reasonable grounds to determine a person, and even if the person was requested to respond to the measurement of drinking, he/she did not comply with the measurement of drinking, by inserting the whole breath of drinking in three times from 06:23 to 06:38 of the same day.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) or 44(2) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. The actual survey report, the statement report on the circumstances of the driver in charge, the on-site photographs and CD images on each notification of the results of the crackdown on driving drinking, respectively;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and each of the Acts and subordinate statutes recorded in investigation status (verification of the same drinking record as the suspect);

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1), 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime, and the selection of a punishment for a crime;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

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 of the community service order and the order to attend a lecture has a history of being punished for driving under drinking, again, the defendant driving under drinking, refused to comply with the police officer's legitimate demand for alcohol testing, and the defendant's attitude at the time of sentencing is bad.

However, it appears that the defendant last made contact with the police to drive drinking, and that he will not repeat the crime.

The defendant is driving under drinking.