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

On October 21, 2009, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 by the Daegu District Court as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On May 24, 2020, at around 04:30, the Defendant driven D low-income vehicle under the influence of alcohol by 0.139% in a section of approximately 1.9km from the front of the Daegu Dong-gu, Daegu to the roads of Daegu Bank distance of about 32,41-gil 32, the same safe-ro.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Reading report, report on the actual state of a drinking driver, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal history records, inquiry reports, and investigation reports (report on confirmation of the same type of force);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

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

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

1. The sentencing reasons of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including the fact that the defendant's error on the grounds of probation or order to attend a lecture does not be mitigated, and the occurrence of traffic accidents, disadvantageous circumstances such as the occurrence of traffic accidents and the fact that the principal takes place against the defendant, and other favorable circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, details of the crime, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime was committed, family relations, economic situation, etc., shall be determined as ordered by taking into