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

On December 12, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of one million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Gwangju District Court, and on July 29, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of 1.5 million won for the same crime at the same court. On May 13, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of five million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the same court.

On August 8, 2017, while under the influence of alcohol level of 00:28%, the Defendant driven a car at C Pool from a Do adjacent to the Pacific-dong, Seo-gu, Seo-gu to a 100-meter distance, according to the same Gu, from a Do adjacent to the Do in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju to a 100-meter distance.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Inquiries about the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (Attachment to the previous summary order);

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

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. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection and Order to provide community service, order to attend lectures, and order to attend lectures;

A. Unfavorable conditions: The Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she was punished four times due to drinking driving, including the record of punishment in all the judgment.

(b) favorable conditions: The defendant's acknowledgement of the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, and there is no record of punishment of suspended execution or more;

C. The Defendant’s punishment was determined in consideration of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, and other various sentencing conditions specified in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which were revealed in the records of the instant case.