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

On July 5, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Gwangju District Court.

On June 28, 2019, around 14:40, the Defendant driven a car at the horse of B in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of approximately 0.046% from the 1km section to the roads near cultural history located in 215 (Dong rejection) according to the same Gu, from the roads adjacent to the 215 (Dong rejection) in the same Gu.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiries about the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of inquiries, such as criminal records, and one copy of a summary order;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. When the sentence of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act includes a long-term force for sentencing, a person who has been punished by a fine twice or for drinking driving prior to the crime of this case shall select and punish the defendant's act at this time in consideration of the fact that the person was punished by imprisonment.

Other punishment as ordered shall be determined in consideration of the blood alcohol concentration, the reason why the drinking driving is conducted, the distance and place of the drinking driving, the distance from the previous drinking record, the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime, etc.