However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date of the final judgment.

On June 18, 2010, the defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million to a fine of KRW 1 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Gwangju District Court on June 18, 2010, and a fine of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the same court on July 30, 2010.

[2014 Highest 2460] On May 1, 2014, the Defendant driven D Neow-si car in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of approximately 0.08% from a section of about 100 meters to a 100-meter radius from the front road of a static apartment cafeteria located in the Sun-gu, Yan-gun, Chon-gun.

[2014 Highest 3769] On August 8, 2016, the Defendant driven a DNS car under the influence of alcohol level 0.120% while under the influence of alcohol level 0.120%, without obtaining a driver’s license in approximately 200 meters from the front of the East Cata in the Japanese Egymbane in the Jeonnam-Eup, Seoul to the front road in the same Eup.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on circumstantial statements, and the register of driver's licenses of each driving driver;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report (report accompanied by a copy of the summary order);

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

(a) For each drunk driving: Imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act due to a drunk driving on May 1, 2014 under Article 148-2 (1) 1, 44 (1), and 1 of the Road Traffic Act;

(b) Unlicensed driving: Article 152 subparagraph 1 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the same Act.

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition, the choice of imprisonment;

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. Although the defendant committed each of the crimes of this case, he/she committed each of the crimes of this case, even though he/she had committed three times a total of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and in particular, again committed the same following crimes after the defendant was prosecuted for the preceding crimes