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 June 11, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Central District Court on the summary order, and on July 5, 2007, a fine of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Sungnam support center, which was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and on November 1, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 10 months for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Jung-gu District Court.

Although the Defendant had had a record of driving alcohol twice or more as above, on February 21, 2016, the Defendant driven a cub car into D while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.151% during blood, and proceeded with approximately 500 meters from the front of the “F” hotel e in Incheon Southern-gu to the 6th floor parking lot on the ground of the above hotel.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

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

1. Before the judgment: Reference to a reply, confirmation of a criminal suspect's previous conviction, and judgment attached thereto or a copy of a summary order; 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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection and Observation, etc. of the Defendant is very poor when the Defendant committed the instant crime despite a number of identical criminal records. However, the Defendant does not confirm the fact that the Defendant has driven a vehicle for a period of not less than eight years from the point of the last same criminal record, and the Defendant seems to drive a vehicle only at a short distance from the point of time to the parking lot after a substitute driver returned the substitute driver to the hotel.