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

On June 9, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million with a fine of KRW 1.5 million with a fine of KRW 2 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving under the influence of sound), and a summary order of KRW 1.5 million with a Seoul Western District Court on July 26, 2016, by a fine of KRW 1.5 million with a penalty of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On July 28, 2020, at around 08:45, the Defendant driven CM3 car in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 0.185% at the 1km section from the front of the building in Gwangjin-gu, Seoul to the front of the building in front of the same Gu.

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Records of seizure of the defendant's legal statement, records of seizure, reports on the control of drinking and driving, reports on the results of the control of drinking and driving, reports on the circumstantial statements of drinking drivers, reports on requests for appraisal, expert reports, and reports on the detection of drinking drivers;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: References to criminal records, copies of summary orders, and copies of summary orders issued under statutes shall apply;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 of the Act on the Election

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Consideration of favorable circumstances, etc. among the reasons for sentencing below);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act ( repeatedly taking into account the favorable circumstances, etc. among the reasons for sentencing as follows);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures;

1. Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year to two years;

2. Determination of sentence [Incompeting circumstances] the fact that the person committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that the person had already been punished twice due to drinking driving, and the drinking water is considerable, etc., the responsibility for the instant crime is hot and the possibility of criticism is high.

[Free circumstances] There is no history of punishment exceeding a fine.

Recognizing the instant crime, one’s mistake is against himself.

In addition, the age, character and conduct, the environment, the circumstances of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime are revealed in the pleadings of this case.