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

[criminal history] On October 22, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving in Drinking), and a summary order of KRW 4 million for a fine of KRW 1.5 million for the same crime from the Suwon Flag Flag on March 15, 2017, respectively.

The reasons are as follows. The duty of prohibiting drinking under Article 44(1) of the current Road Traffic Act is stipulated in Article 41(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 7545 of May 31, 2005 and enforced from June 1, 2006; hereinafter the same shall apply) before June 1, 2006. Article 148-2(1) of the Road Traffic Act provides that “A person who violates Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act on at least two occasions.” Under the principle of statutoryism, a person who violates Article 41(1) of the former Road Traffic Act may not be deemed to have violated Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act on the road at intervals of 0:5 meters prior to May 1, 2005.”

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

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of a driver who is in charge of driving and notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and of a summary order, to two Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 148-2(1) and Article 44-2(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 17371 of Jun. 9, 2020), Articles 148-2(1) and 44(1) of the same Act, the selection of punishment for a crime

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 of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures has been punished several times for the same crime, and the defendant recognizes and reflects the crime, and the defendant is the defendant.