However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On November 25, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million with a fine of KRW 1 million in the same court on August 10, 2016 due to the same crime, etc., at the Ulsan District Court, for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.

On February 4, 2017, under the influence of alcohol level of 0.104% from blood transfusion around 21:33, the Defendant driven C Poter truck in the section of about seven kilometers from the front of the restaurant where it is impossible to know the trade name located in the Seocheon-dong, Busan, North-dong, and the lower part of the road located in the Dong Kim-si, Kim Jong-si, Kim Jong-do.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice, drives a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: To apply a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, a criminal investigation report (Attachment to a copy of a summary order), and a copy of summary order;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1, Article 44 (1) (not less than three times of drinking), Article 152 subparagraph 1, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55 subparag. 1 subparag. 3 of the Criminal Act (see the following favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Circumstances favorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act: The confession, the serious reflectivity, and the fact that the previous conviction, other than the previous conviction, was the previous conviction before 2004;

(i) Unfavorable circumstances: The fact that there are more two previous drivers of drinking, in addition to the previous convictions indicated in the judgment, and the latter repeats drinking and non-licensed driving in a short period, notwithstanding the repeated punishment;