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

On August 28, 2012, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Seoul Southern District Court on August 28, 2012, and a summary order of KRW 5 million for the same crime from the Busan District Court’s Branch Branch on May 26, 2016, respectively.

Although the Defendant had had had a record of driving alcohol twice or more as above, on November 13, 2017, the Defendant driven B rocketing car under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.084% during blood, and proceeded with approximately 300 meters from the roads front of the 743-way route prior to the point of the Sugn-gu in Incheon Gyeyang-gu Operation Dong to the end of the 743-way route.

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 crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous conviction: References to inquiries, investigation reports (verification of the history of the same type of crime), and copies of the summary order attached thereto; and

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. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (the fact that his/her mistake is repented, etc.) of the mitigated amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following extenuating circumstances in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Protection, Observation, etc. of the Order to Attend the School, and Article 62-2(1) of the Road Traffic Act, even though there were two times of crime records and several times of violation of the Road Traffic Act, in the case of the instant crime in which the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, the nature of the relevant crime is inferior. However, although the alcohol concentration in blood is not relatively high, the driving distance is not relatively high, and the driving distance does not reach a relatively long range, the fact that the Defendant did not go against other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes, the fact that the Defendant’s mistake is unfolded, and all other circumstances surrounding the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and family relationship