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

【Criminal Records of Crimes】 On November 21, 201, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million at the Seoul Western District Court for a crime of violating road traffic laws (drinking driving), and on June 25, 201, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 4 million for a crime of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and a crime of violating Road Traffic Act (drinking driving).

【Criminal facts” without obtaining a driver’s license on December 31, 2015, the Defendant driven B automobiles at a section of about 100 meters from the distance near the sular village in Eunpyeong-gu, Seoul to the 45 west-ro, and under the influence of alcohol at 0.095% during blood.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of the driver's license in driving and the driver's license ledger;

1. Records of judgment: Application of inquiry letter, such as criminal history, and statutes;

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. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of ordinary concurrent crimes (Punishment provided for in a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act which is heavier than punishment);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (Article 55 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing)

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Code of the Order to Attend a lecture in this case, even though the defendant had been punished three times due to drinking driving, as well as the criminal records as stated in the judgment, and again, the driving of this case and theless driving of a license are required.

However, there is no record that the defendant recognized his mistake, there is no more severe punishment than a fine for the last ten years, from the beginning, it seems that the defendant was driving after the dispute with the substitute driver, not from the beginning.