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

[criminal history] On August 29, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (dacting driving) in the support of the Southern District Court of Gwangju metropolitan area.

[2] On August 9, 2020, the Defendant driven around 100 meters of 10 meters from the front to the front road located in Jindo-gun B, which is a convenience store located in Jindo-gun B, while under the influence of alcohol at around 02:30% of alcohol during blood.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Consent to and confirmation of blood collection, a protocol of seizure, and a list of seizure;

1. A response to a request for appraisal (including an appraisal report attached thereto);

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous conviction: Application of a written reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A), investigation report (in violation of Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act), copy of a summary order, and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the provision of community service order and the order to attend lectures is not very good for the crime to be committed at any time due to the act of spreading the risk of causing human life, and the voice of our society demanding strong punishment is high.

The defendant is a person who has been punished for drinking twice in the past.

Nevertheless, the risk of drinking driving has not been closed and the driving of drinking again brings about serious danger to the safety of the general public.

At the time, the defendant's blood alcohol concentration in the blood of the defendant seems to be significant.

However, the defendant seems to have a wrong attitude and repent, and even if so, the risk that the defendant has caused is not realized the life or body of a third party.