However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 24, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of a fine of KRW 700,000 to a fine of KRW 700,000 for the violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Cheongju District Court on July 24, 2008, and the criminal records of the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) are more than twice.

Nevertheless, at around 20:20 on December 23, 2019, the Defendant driven a E car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.138% from the Do in front of the Heung-gu Seoul Metropolitan City to the roads in front of the Heung-gu Seoul Metropolitan City D from the Do in the Heung-gu Seoul Metropolitan City to approximately 300 meters.

Around 07:40 on March 26, 2020, the Defendant driven an EKa-car on the front side of G in a considerable area of Cheongju-si and from the front side of G in a considerable area of Cheongju-si to the front road of Isung-si, Cheongju-si without obtaining a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

"200 Highest 48"

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking driving, and report on the situation of drinking drivers;

1. Criminal history records, etc. inquiry reports and investigation reports (verification, etc. of the same kind of power);

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a license ledger;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the facts of crime, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty, subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Despite the fact that the sentencing of Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the Act on Probation and Order to Attend Courses had many criminal convictions for the reasons of sentencing, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant in light of the defendant's attitude in each of the crimes of this case, but the same criminal conviction was both fines, and other various sentencing conditions such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, etc., in order to prevent recidivism, the probation shall be imposed and the order to attend lectures shall be imposed only once.