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 June 22, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Seo-gu District Court’s Seo-Support on Road Traffic Act, and on October 17, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of five million won for the same crime and was sentenced to a fine of five million won or more for the same crime in the Daegu District Court.

[Criminal facts] On January 2, 2017, the Defendant driven a B K3 vehicle with approximately KRW 1km up to the road front of the mountain zone located in the same mountain zone located in the Daegu Northern-dong 277-54, Daegu Northern-dong, under the influence of alcohol content of 0.159% during blood transfusion around 23:53, 2017.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries into the circumstantial records of drivers who take driving and the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, investigation report, and summary order-making statute, such as criminal history;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) (Selection of Imprisonment) 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 grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act include the number of times and time when the defendant was punished for the same kind of crime, the number of alcohol concentration in blood at the time of driving the drinking of this case, the defendant's age, sexual conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of the various reasons for sentencing as shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age