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

On April 27, 2016, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million by the Ulsan District Court due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On July 17, 2019, at around 01:46, the Defendant driven a car at the horse at C, while under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.201%, from the 1km section to the front road of the unmanned airfield, in the same city of Geum-gu, Geumpo-gu, Geumpo-gu, Seoul, a water-ro, the front of the unmanned airfield.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (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 for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act provides for the following reasons: (a) even though there was a record of punishment for driving under the influence of alcohol by the defendant for the reason of sentencing; (b) the degree of drinking of this case is relatively heavy; (c) the degree of the drinking of this case is divided after the crime; (d) the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment other than once for driving under the influence of alcohol; and (e) other conditions of sentencing as indicated in the record, such as the defendant’s age, occupation, occupation, character and behavior, family relationship, living environment, circumstances leading to the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence like the order shall be