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

On August 26, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court on August 26, 2008, and a summary order of KRW 2 million to a fine at the same court on January 25, 2018, respectively.

On July 17, 2019, at around 23:35, the Defendant driven B 124CC, which was owned by the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol concentration of approximately 0.174% from the section of approximately 1.5km from the 1st century to the front road of the so-called Busan-dong, the Busan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. One copy of the circumstantial statement, investigation report, and appraisal report from the employer;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of two copies of summary order Acts and subordinate 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. In view of the fact that the Defendant, with the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, committed the instant crime even though he/she had been punished for the same kind of crime, the Defendant’s responsibility for the crime is not somewhat weak.

However, the punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the fact that the defendant commits a mistake, the age, character and conduct of the defendant, and various conditions of sentencing shown in the trial, such as the environment.