However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal history] On October 4, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating road traffic law in the Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court, and a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime in the same court on May 4, 2016, respectively.

[2] On May 10, 2016, the Defendant driven a coo motor vehicle in B while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.137% at the section of approximately 3.1km from May 10, 2016 to the front side of the Cheongdo reservoir located in the same city-ro. The Defendant driven a coo motor vehicle in B under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.137%.

As a result, the Defendant, who had a driving record of drinking more than twice, driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the circumstances of driving at home and a report on the circumstances of the driver at home;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and an investigation report (Attachment to the summary order of the relevant case) statute;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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 punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking account of all the conditions of sentencing recorded in the records, such as the protection observation and attendance order, community service, the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and the age, sex, circumstances, circumstances before and after the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc.

D. Unfavorable circumstances: The reality is that a person who gets injured due to drinking is killed and injured, so the drinking driving cannot be used for any reason, and the defendant caused a significant risk to traffic safety by high alcohol concentration at the time of the crime of this case.

It seems that the defendant has already been punished twice due to drinking driving, and has again made the crime of this case within a short time, and there is a high possibility of criticism.