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

On March 29, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of one million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Changwon District Court on March 29, 201, a summary order of two million won by the same court as a fine for the same crime on December 27, 2010, and a summary order of two million won by the same court on April 29, 201 was sentenced to imprisonment for the same crime and two years by the same court on April 29, 201.

Around 00:40 on July 9, 2016, the Defendant driven a car with C low-speed at approximately 10km from the parking lot in Sungwon-gu, Sungwon-si to the road in front of the Gu Gacheon-gu, Changnam-dong, Changwon-si to the same level of 10km from the parking lot in the upper south-dong, Changwon-gu, Sungwon-si to the road.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the drinking driving control, and the status of driving under the influence of alcohol;

1. Previous convictions indicated in the judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, investigation reports, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances shall be considered for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, committed the instant crime again even though he/she had been sentenced to a fine twice for the violation of the Road Traffic Act and a suspended sentence once, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment, and the Defendant again committed the instant crime. The fact that the blood alcohol concentration level at the time of driving under the influence of alcohol was high is a reason for sentencing unfavorable to the Defendant.

However, in light of the favorable reasons for sentencing, such as the defendant's scrapping of the instant vehicle, etc., and the fact that it was not causing a traffic accident due to the drinking driving of this case, and other favorable reasons for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the circumstances after the crime, shall be sentenced to the same sentence as the order.