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

On November 9, 2012, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million by the Seoul Western District Court as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

The Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol around 04:20 on August 9, 2020, driven DPoter Ⅱ truck at approximately 2.9 km from around the 0.146% of alcohol level on the roads near Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B to the roads near Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of two Acts and subordinate statutes of Part II to the accused's statutory statement, circumstantial statement, records of the crackdown on drunk driving, and references to criminal records, investigation reports (verification of the suspect's same records), and summary order;

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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The defendant of the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, even though he had the record of being punished for drinking alcohol driving, was also driving under the influence of alcohol in this case.

On the other hand, the drinking driving of this case did not lead to a traffic accident, and the defendant again does not drive under the influence of alcohol.

In addition, the degree of blood alcohol concentration in the instant case and the driving distance, age, character and conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the criminal act, circumstances after the criminal act, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined in full view of various circumstances, which are the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments.