A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

2. In full view of the arguments of this case and the reasons for sentencing indicated in the records, such as the following facts: (a) the defendant has been sentenced to a stay of execution two times for the same crime; (b) one-time criminal punishment for the defendant; and (c) the defendant was sentenced to a stay of execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the same kind of crime; and (d) the defendant was sentenced to a stay of execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime and was sentenced to a fine or suspended execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the remaining one month; and (e) the defendant has already been revealed that there was no special preventive effect on the same crime; (b) the defendant’s age, occupation, family relation relationship

3. If so, the prosecutor's appeal is reasonable, and the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is rendered after pleading.

【Grounds for the Judgment of the Supreme Court which has been written] Criminal facts and summary of evidence are identical to facts constituting a crime and summary of evidence recognized by the court, and the summary of evidence is identical to each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below. Thus, they are cited in accordance with Article

Application of Statutes

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1, Article 44 (1) (a point of sound driving), Article 152 subparagraph 1, and Article 43 (a) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018);

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;