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

On July 13, 2019, the Defendant was under the control of the Daegu East Police Station as a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

Nevertheless, at around 01:47 August 1, 2019, the Defendant driven a F Sti-type car in the state of alcohol 0.11% alcohol concentration at approximately 50 meters from the Do in front of “C” located in the same city as “E” located in D in the same city as “E” in the same city.

Accordingly, the defendant has driven a car while under influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking-driving, report on the circumstances of drinking-driving drivers, and investigation report (report on the circumstances of drinking-driving drivers);

1. Photographs and a list of 112 reported cases;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the point of a violation, manufacturing, and driving control results;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Mitigation: Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution: Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Probation, community service order, or order to attend education: Operation was conducted under the influence of blood alcohol level again because it was not controlled due to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act.

provided, however, that the crime is recognized;

Other circumstances, driving distance, etc. shall be taken into account.