[criminal history] The Defendant was sentenced to one year of a suspended sentence of six months for a crime of violating road traffic law in the support of the Chungcheong District Court on January 5, 2016, and on December 13, 2017, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of a suspended sentence on December 21, 2017 by imprisonment for a crime of violating road traffic law at the Jeju District Court on December 13, 2017 and was sentenced to two years of a suspended sentence for a crime of violating road traffic law. The said judgment became final and conclusive on December 21, 201

[Criminal facts] On June 12, 2018, at around 21:47, the Defendant driven a Fextonton car that was not covered by mandatory insurance without obtaining a driver’s license from the front of the Maurel located in Hong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Hongsung-gun, about 3km from the front of the Maur to the front road, without obtaining a driver’s license from about 0.088% of alcohol concentration in blood.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A report on the detection of a primary driver;

1. An explanatory note;

1. Inquiries about mandatory insurance and information about non-life insurance;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a written reply to inquiry, such as criminal history (A), text of judgment, and summary order statutes;

1. Articles 148-2(1)1, 44(1)1, 152 subparag. 1, and 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 46(2)2, and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act (a point of operating an automobile with no mandatory insurance)

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da15488, Apr. 1, 2009) was that the Defendant had been a person who had been driven by two drinking for the last three years, and that the Defendant was a person who had been again

It is inevitable to repeatedly punish the defendant who caused public danger because he/she has repeated drinking and non-licensed driving without any awareness even in repeated punishment and a warning of law, and because he/she has not bought mandatory insurance, it is inevitable to severely punish the defendant.

This is against this, and it is against this.