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.

[criminal history] On July 22, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 4 million by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Busan District Court and KRW 5 million by the same court on November 22, 2014, respectively.

[2] On June 15, 2018, the Defendant driven CM5 car under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.166% in the 2km section from the 1821-7 Simpon-ro 19mpon-ro 19mpon-ro from the 1821-7 Simpon-ro, the center of the CM5 car, to the 19mpon-ro 19mpon-ro 19mpon-ro.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving at least twice, but again, the prohibition of drinking driving was violated.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the circumstances of the driver at home, a report on the circumstances of the driver at home, and an investigation report;

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (report on confirmation of the previous history thereof), application of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant was punished twice due to drinking driving, and there are many criminal records, and that drinking is considerably high, etc. are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the sentence like the order shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant recognizes his mistake and reflects the fact that the defendant does not drive drinking again, and other conditions of sentencing as shown in the records, such as the age, occupation, sex, family relationship, and circumstances before and after the crime.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.