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

[Criminal Power] On March 14, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000,000 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Seocho District Court’s territorial branch.

【Criminal Facts】

On July 5, 2020, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol content of 0.126% on blood alcohol content at around 03:05, and the Defendant was driving a B-learning car from a funeral port located on the coast of 58, 18, 196, 200 to the front distance of the inner public playground No. 97-ro 18, 196.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement report, investigation report, notification of the results of the control of drinking driving, making inquiries into the enemy, and investigation report (specific place of crime);

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a 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's mistake in sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is recognized.

However, even though the defendant had been punished for the same kind of crime, he again committed the same crime.

In addition, the crime of drinking driving is highly likely to cause danger to life, body and property of a third party, and there is a need for strict punishment.

In addition, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in consideration of all the sentencing conditions, such as the background of the instant crime and the blood alcohol concentration of the Defendant at the time of the instant case.