[criminal power] On February 4, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Daegu District Court to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving). On February 2, 2018, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Daegu District Court.

【Criminal Facts】

On January 9, 2019, the Defendant violated the provision on the prohibition of drunk driving twice or more as above, and again, driven a BMW car at a section of about 50 meters from the distance near the Busan-gu B hotel to the front of the B hotel, Busan-gu, Busan-gu, without a driver’s license, while under the influence of alcohol 0.082%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Investigation report (report on the circumstances of a drinking driver) and internal investigation report (the confirmation of the driving under influence of alcohol not less than twice);

1. Notification of the results of the drinking driving control, report on the circumstances of drinking drivers, inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving, the register of driver's licenses (a), and disqualified meetings of the main office;

1. Criminal records as indicated in the judgment: Criminal history records, inquiry reports (verification of sound driving records), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of two copies of summary orders;

1. Relevant statutory provisions of Article 148-2(1)1 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018) regarding criminal facts include the corresponding portion of the applicable provisions of indictment as “Article 148-2(2)1 of the Road Traffic Act” but it is obvious that, in light of the facts charged, it is obvious that it is a clerical error in Article 148-2(1)1 of the Road Traffic Act.

Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the former Road Traffic Act (amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018) which was in force at the time of the institution of the instant indictment, and the statutory penalty under Article 148-2 (2) 1 of the same Act is the same as that of the statutory penalty under Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the same Act. Thus, even if it is corrected ex officio

Accordingly, it shall be corrected ex officio:

Article 44 (1) (the point of a sound driving),