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.

【The Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000,000 by the Suwon District Court on January 22, 2007 due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), a summary order of KRW 2 million on March 26, 2007, a fine of KRW 2 million due to the same crime, etc. on March 26, 2007, and a summary order of KRW 3 million from the Suwon District Court on September 17, 2010 to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), respectively.

【Criminal facts” around 00:20 on May 7, 2016, the Defendant driven a B-hand car under the influence of alcohol content of about 20km from the 20km section to the 20km point road in the same Gun from the roads of the south-do Donwon apartment located in the Nam-gun, Nam-gun, Nam-gun, Nam-gun, Nam-gun, Seoul, to the 20km point in the same Gun.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice, drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The circumstantial statement of the driver involved and response to a request for appraisal;

1. Previous conviction: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, (A) and an investigation report (Attachment to a copy of a summary order for the same type of crime);

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. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Provide community service and attend lecture had the record of serving several punishments for the same kind of crime, the crime of this case is disadvantageous to the defendant, but it is against the defendant's recognition of the crime of this case. The crime of this case occurred more than six years after the date of the previous crime, and the defendant has no record of punishment exceeding the fine, etc. shall be considered as favorable to the defendant, and the age of the defendant shall be considered as favorable to the defendant.