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.

【The Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 on April 29, 2009 to a fine of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in the support of the Suwon Frigwon, and on October 26, 2012, the Seoul Southern District Court issued a summary order of KRW 2 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Seoul Southern District Court.

【Criminal facts” around July 23:20, 2018, the Defendant driven a B windows car with alcohol content of 0.192% at the distance of five kilometers from the baby distance located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the Dowing-ro at the entrance of Dobong-gu, Dobong-gu, Seoul to the shooting distance at approximately 5.12.

Therefore, even though the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving at least twice, the Defendant again driven a car while under influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. An explanatory note;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous conviction: Inquiry about criminal history and application of the Acts and subordinate statutes reporting criminal history;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (referring to driving under influence of alcohol) applicable to the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment for imprisonment, and the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Attend a lecture is that the Defendant committed the instant crime in the state of drinking at the same time, despite the fact that the Defendant had already been punished for driving under drinking twice.

In light of the fact that the driving of a defendant's drinking by a report by another person has been controlled, it shall be taken that the driver was a dangerous situation at the time.

Therefore, the defendant is selected to be sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor, but the defendant has no record of being sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor or heavier punishment for the same crime, there is no separate traffic accident in the driving of the drinking of this case, the defendant's last driving of drinking of this case has not been accompanied by about six years, and the defendant's mistake has been divided and reflected.