On June 15, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Jung-gu District Court on December 13, 201, a fine of seven million won for the same crime in the same court on December 13, 2013, and a summary order of eight million won for the same crime in the same court on May 22, 2014, respectively. On November 19, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime at the same court on November 27, 2014, which became final and conclusive on November 27, 2014.

On June 3, 2015, at around 21:00, the Defendant driven a Clearning car under the influence of alcohol 0.220% of alcohol concentration in blood without a driver’s license, from the vicinity to the 8-lane in the port of the same Eup to the 8-lane in the port of the Eup.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements prepared in the D;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. License register;

1. Records before and after judgments: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports (A), investigation reports (limited to the same type of power, and summary orders);

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting a crime (the point of a sound driving) and subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 152 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation has a history of being sentenced to punishment several times for the same kind of crime, and in particular, even if the defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months on November 19, 2014 due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) on the grounds of a violation of the Road Traffic Act on November 19, 2014, he/she committed the instant crime again during the suspended sentence, and is driving under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.220% without a driver’s license.

In light of the fact that the nature of the crime is poor, such as attaching a witness to the end of the prosecution, the sentence of the defendant has to be imposed.

However, the defendant has no record of being sentenced to punishment for the same crime, and has depth of his mistake.