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.

On February 28, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of one million won or more for a crime of violating road traffic laws (drinking driving) at the Goyang Branch of the Jung-gu District Court on February 28, 2007, and on December 10, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of 1.5 million won or more for the same crime from the Goyang Branch of the Jung-gu District Court as a fine

On January 31, 2018, the Defendant driven a B knife vehicle with a alcohol content of about 2km from the front of the gold village in the Geumju-si, Saju to the front of the gold village in the Geum-dong, Saju-si, Saju-si, Saju-si, with a alcohol content of at least 0.194% among blood, while under the influence of alcohol.

Accordingly, the Defendant, even though he had a history of driving a motor vehicle more than twice, has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiry into the results of crackdown on the driving of alcohol, a statement in the circumstances of the driver making the alcohol, and a statement of alcohol alcohol during blood;

1. Application of an inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and reporting on the result of confirmation before and after the disposition;

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the following grounds for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had been subject to two times of criminal punishment due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the alcohol concentration in blood at the time of the instant crime is 0.194%, and the Defendant has a high numerical value, and there are no circumstances to consider in the circumstance where he/she became driving at the time of the instant crime, and the driving of drinking is a crime that may cause serious damage to another person’s life, body, or property as well as his/her own, and that there is a need for the corresponding punishment.

However, it is against the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime of this case and is subject to a fine.