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

On March 26, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of 2 million won or more for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Seocho District Court's territorial branch on March 26, 2007, and a summary order of 3 million won or more for the same crime at the Seoul Western District Court on July 23, 2010, respectively.

Nevertheless, around 17:02 on June 10, 2014, the Defendant driven Daba under the influence of alcohol 0.231% in the section of approximately 1.2km from the front of the Sungdong branch of Korea Electric Power Corporation located in Seongdong-dong, Seongdong-gu, Seoul to the front road of the same 761-8.

Accordingly, the defendant was punished for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at least twice, and driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, the results of the drinking driving control, and the details of drinking output;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records, etc., inquiry reports and investigation reports (attached to a summary order);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The same sentence as the order shall be determined in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Act, the measurement of alcohol, the background and distance of drunk driving, the same criminal record and the defendant's reflect

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.