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

On August 12, 2008, the defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act by the District Court of Jung-gu.

On July 5, 2020, at around 14:30, the Defendant violated the duty of prohibition of drunk driving by driving EXE at least twice in the 20km section from the front of the Criart in the Gyeonggi Macheon B to the front of the Defendant’s residence in the same city D to the front of the Defendant’s residence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the situation of driving under the influence of alcohol, report on the situation of a driver under the influence of alcohol, and inquiry into the results of the crackdown on drinking;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on criminal records, etc. inquiry reports (A) and investigation reports (attached to the same 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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant again committed the instant crime even if he had the same criminal record, the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant was high enough, the defendant's age, character and behavior and environment, the defendant's age, character and behavior and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., taking into account the conditions of sentencing specified in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc.