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

[criminal power] On February 15, 2012, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on February 15, 201, and a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for the same crime at the same court on September 7, 2012.

【Criminal Facts】

On March 27, 2020, at around 23:05, the Defendant driven a DNA car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.126% from the 1km section from the roads near Bupyeong-gu Incheon Bupyeong-gu, Incheon to the front roads in C in the same Gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, repeated statements, and application of each summary order statutes;

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

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

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant has been punished twice for the same kind of offense, but he/she re-driving the motor vehicle.

However, the fact that the driver returns the vehicle that he had driven and again does not drive under the influence of alcohol shall be considered as favorable factors, such as the fact that the same record of the crime was eight years, and that there was no other record of the crime, etc., and the degree of other driving, the age of the defendant, character and conduct, and environment, etc., and the sentencing conditions of Article 51 of the Criminal Act as stated in the records of this case shall be determined