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

On January 12, 2001, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Busan District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million to a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act; on January 11, 2003, a summary order of KRW 1.5 million to a fine of KRW 1.5 million to a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving); on October 13, 2009, the former District Court issued a summary order of KRW 3 million to a fine of KRW 3 million to a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the former District Court on August 29, 201; on November 16, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 5 million to a fine of KRW 5 million to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving); on December 26, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor of KRW 1.4 million from the Seoul District Court on December 26, 2014.

On October 23, 2014, around 02:08, the Defendant driven a fluent car in the state of alcohol with approximately 0.103% alcohol concentration in blood at approximately 200 meters from the front line of the “7080” main road in Yangju-si, Yangju-si, Yangju-ro, 39, Yangju-do, 48 New Apartment-do, Bru-do, 200 to the front distance of the new apartment.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice, was driving a motor vehicle again under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver;

1. Statement under the circumstances of driving at home;

1. Photographs;

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

1. Previous convictions in judgment: A reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on the result of confirmation of the disposition unknown telephone, summary order, and application of text 4 of the judgment;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44-2 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The defendant with reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, such as the observation of protection and the order to provide community service and attend lectures, shall examine the warrant in question after committing the instant crime.