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

[Criminal Power] On October 18, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1,50,000,000 from the Daegu District Court as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

On March 4, 2020, at around 01:52, the Defendant driven a DM3 car in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.144% from the 15km section from the Daegu Dong-dong to the front road located in the same city north-gu B.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the state of state of drinking drivers, and notification of the results of the regulation of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, repeated statements and summary order-related 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. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of committing the crime, the circumstances after committing the crime, etc., and the conditions of various sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the following circumstances.

Unfavorable circumstances: The drinking driving has been repeated despite the history of punishment for drinking driving.

The blood alcohol concentration level has high, resulting in the occurrence of traffic hazard.

The favorable circumstances: The crime is recognized.

There shall be no history of punishment of imprisonment without prison labor or more.