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

Since June 1, 2006, the Defendant is a person who has violated the prohibition of drinking under the Road Traffic Act two times or more.

Nevertheless, at around 21:50 on March 19, 2016, the Defendant driven H Haststa car in a state of under the influence of alcohol content of about 20 meters from the street in front of a restaurant located in the Dong-dong, Daejeon to the street in front of a gas station located in the same area, without a driver's license, at approximately 0.079% of alcohol content in blood (Yurlung-gu).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of alcohol, statement of the situation of the driver driving, and the register of driver's licenses;

1. Previous conviction: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of inquiry about criminal history;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense; Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving)

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

1. Imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

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

1. The sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is not high in the numerical value of the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence, the defendant reflects the fact that the defendant is punished beyond the fine, there is no record of the crime committed against the defendant, and other various sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, etc. shall be comprehensively considered,