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 September 3, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 from the Suwon District Court to a fine of KRW 1,50,000 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. On October 19, 2015, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million as the same crime in the same court.

【Criminal Facts】

On October 21, 2019, at around 00:14, the Defendant was under the influence of 0.096% of 0.0% of blood alcohol, and the Defendant driven CK9 car at approximately 5km from the front side of the Shinnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-si, Seoul, to the front side of the 1947 Ginam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Seoul, 1947, and 4.2km in front of the Knnam-dong Highway (Seoul direction).

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the situation of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the situation of a driver under the influence of alcohol, and inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking;

1. Registers of driver's licenses, chassiss, and mandatory insurance;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports (verification of sound driving records);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Consideration of favorable circumstances, etc. among the following reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Consideration of favorable circumstances, etc. among the reasons for sentencing following the suspended sentence);

1. The normal drinking operation disadvantageous to the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is not only a crime that may pose a danger to traffic order by itself, but also cause serious personal and material damage, such as the occurrence of traffic accidents.

The Defendant again committed the crime of drinking-driving in this case even though he had the record of punishment twice as stated in the record of the crime record.

An expressway is included in the section of drinking driving.

In favor of the favorable normal defendant, the defendant recognized his criminal liability, and shows the form of reflection.

The crime of this case did not cause a traffic accident.