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 October 15, 2004 and April 23, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 and KRW 1.5 million, respectively, for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Gwangju District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

On October 22, 2019, around 19:20, the Defendant driven a Fpoter II cargo vehicle with approximately KRW 200 meters distance from the front road of the “C” located in Young-gun B, Young-gun to the front road of the “Ehigh School” in D, while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.089%, while driving a Fpoter II truck.

Accordingly, the defendant has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol not less than twice in violation of the prohibition of drunk driving.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The circumstantial statement statement and investigation report of the employer (the circumstantial report of the employer-employed driver);

1. Criminal records: To refer to inquiries, and to the application of each summary order statutes;

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1448, Apr. 2, 20

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (hereinafter “the grounds for the suspended sentence”), whichever is favorable, has been repeatedly considered;

1. Although the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. are relatively old, the defendant has a number of criminal records, and as shown in the judgment of the court, the blood alcohol concentration of the previous record that was punished twice or twice due to drinking driving, respectively, includes 0.061% and 0.088%, respectively.

Nevertheless, the defendant will choose imprisonment in that the amount of blood alcohol concentration (0.089%) is not lower than that of the defendant's driving under the influence of alcohol.

However, it shall be considered favorable to the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine due to drinking driving, the fact that the defendant was not punished due to drinking driving after 2010, and the fact that the defendant is seriously against the defendant.

(b) other.