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

On September 28, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating road traffic law in the support for the safeness of a water source method, and on April 21, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating road traffic law in the support for the safeness of a water source method, and on April 21, 2014.

Criminal facts

Although the Defendant had had the record of violating drinking driving on more than two occasions, on January 23, 2018, the Defendant driven BM5 cars under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.184% in the 2km section from 00:28 to 1161 in Sinsan-si, Suyang-si, Suyang-si, Annyang-si, Annyang-si, to 1161.1.8% in alcohol level.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Fact-finding reports on drivers of drinking alcohol and inquiry into the results of regulating drinking alcohol driving;

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

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

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

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

1. Even though there was a record of being punished twice due to the driving of drinking for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the fact that drinking was done at the same time and the drinking value was high is disadvantageous, but the accident did not occur, and the defendant is against the depth, the punishment is determined like the order, taking into account the circumstances in which the defendant is against the depth.