2.Provided, That the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

On September 8, 2008, the Defendant has been in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act by issuing a summary order of a fine of one million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Southern District Court on September 8, 2008, and by issuing a summary order of four million won for the same crime at the same court on February 18, 2013.

On April 14, 2018, at around 05:00, the Defendant driven a B-to-purd motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of about 15 km from the front of the front golf course in the trade name of Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu to the front of the 442nd class in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, with approximately 15km alcohol level of about 0.115% in alcohol level.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking and statement in the circumstances of the driver of drinking;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (the previous confirmation of such past history);

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 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 to mitigate small amount;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Community Service and Order to Attend Education, even though the defendant had been punished for drinking twice in the past, the defendant committed the crime of this case again. The defendant stopped the vehicle on the road on the road by driving while driving the vehicle, and committed the crime of this case on the other vehicle's report. The defendant's above crime committed the above crime of this case, which interfere with the communication of other vehicles, and the risk of traffic accidents is significant, and therefore, the criminal liability of this case is heavy.

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects his mistake shall be considered as favorable to the defendant.

The above circumstances include the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.