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

On March 19, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime such as violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), and on December 24, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 3.5 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) from the Jung-gu District Court on December 24, 2009, and on May 9, 2014, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 5 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) from the Jung-gu District Court on December 18, 2014, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 27, 2014.

Criminal facts

On December 10, 2016, at around 22:18, the Defendant driven a D low typ car in the state of alcohol alcohol with approximately 1.5m alcohol concentration of about 0.139% from the front corner of the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Gangseo-gu Office to the 245-ro, Gangseo-gu, Gangseo-gu, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of a driver who is placed in driving and notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment to the same type of force);

1. The provision of Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime under the relevant provision of the Act;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The Defendant’s reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, including the previous convictions on probation, has reached four times before and after drinking, including the previous convictions on probation, and the two times of which are not a simple drinking driving, but a traffic accident is involved. The instant drinking driving is a crime during the same period of suspension of execution. There are unfavorable circumstances that the blood alcohol concentration at the time of the instant case is higher than 0.139%.

However, in light of the fact that the instant crime is against the Defendant, and the details of the use of the agency driving from May 28, 2016 to January 3, 2017 are up to 112 times, it appears that he/she used the agency driving on his/her own if he/she drinks the instant act. The Defendant did not drink the following after the instant case.