On September 24, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment due to a violation of road traffic law (driving alcohol) and a violation of road traffic law (non-licensed driving) in the port branch of the Daegu District Court on September 24, 2015, and was released on August 13, 2016 in the execution of the sentence on September 23, 2016, and was released on September 23, 2016, and was released on September 9, 2016.

Although the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice, the Defendant driven a G-type cargo vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.129% without obtaining a driver’s license from the front road of the Defendant’s residence in the south-gu area D at the port on June 30, 2017 to the front road of the E- seat F. In short, the Defendant driven a G-type truck under the influence of alcohol content of about 1km without obtaining a driver’s license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Making a statement on the circumstances of a driver driving a drinking and inquiring about the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. A previous conviction: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (a repeated crime and judgment related to the same criminal record and details of inquiry about expropriation);

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. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act for aggravated repeated crimes;

1. Determination as to the defendant and his/her defense counsel's assertion under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of small amount

1. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, was physically and mentally weak due to intellectual disability.

2. In light of the facts leading to the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state of weak ability to discern things or make decisions at the time of the instant crime in light of the Defendant’s speech and behavior at the time of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, even though the fact that the Defendant was suffering from intellectual disability 3.

It is difficult to see it.

Therefore, the above assertion is valid.