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

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On June 10, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Ulsan District Court.

【Criminal facts】 On October 18, 2020, the Defendant driven a D K7 vehicle under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.114% from a section of about 2 km from the front road of Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, to the front road of Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Seoul-do.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving regulations not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Fact-finding reports, investigation reports, and inquiry into the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and a summary order;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the selection of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “reasons for sentencing”), 53 and 55(1)3 of the Act on the Mitigation of Small Quantity, which are favorable to the Defendant

1. Although there were two times of punishment due to drinking driving prior to the reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “the reason for sentencing”), the Defendant committed the instant drinking alcohol crime at the time, and the fact that the Defendant’s blood blood concentration level was considerable and that the Defendant’s liability for the crime is not less harsh, etc. is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the fact that the risk of traffic accidents has not been realized due to the crime of this case, the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime and is against the depth of the crime, and that there is no particular criminal record after the record of the crime of this case.

In addition, the defendant's difficult economic situation, age, sex, environment, occupation, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., and all the circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing as shown in the oral argument shall be determined as the same as the order.