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

Around 22:50 on June 13, 2013, the Defendant driven a Crens car at approximately 2 km from the roads adjacent to a mutual influorite house located in a two-meter high-tech district in the Gwangju Mine-gu to the roads front of the same Gu Tchip high-tech hospital.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written notification on the result of drinking driving control;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that selects the penalty;

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 was sentenced to a summary order of a fine for the first time due to drunk driving in 2005 and again carried out drinking driving in spite of the fact that he had been sentenced four times due to drinking driving for three years thereafter. In light of the above, there is a need for the defendant to be sentenced to strict punishment, and thus, he should be sentenced to a warning.

On the other hand, there is no same kind of crime for about five years since the last punishment in 2008, and there is no possibility that the defendant will not repeat the same crime while disposing of the vehicle after the crime and opposing it.

Considering the above circumstances, the execution of imprisonment is suspended more than once, and certain matters to be observed shall be given, and a considerable grace period shall be set.