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.

On November 7, 2006, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a fine for a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving), and on February 25, 2013, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 6 million as a fine for a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving) at the Changwon District Court’s Tongwon District Court’s Tong branch branch on November 7, 2006.

On October 06, 2017, the Defendant did not enter into a mandatory insurance policy at around 10:50, but driven a BMW car from the second apartment of the Jeju-gu apartment in the Dong-dong without the influence of alcohol content of 0.138% in the blood, to the front of the king-gu Doming-ri road located in the Dong-dong in the Dong-gu, Dong-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident and an investigation report on the actual condition of a traffic accident;

1. A report on the circumstances of a driver driving a drinking and notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Inquiry into mandatory insurance;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (verification of the same kind of force);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of drinking), Article 46 (2) 2 and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act (the point of operating automobiles which are not mandatory insurance), and selection of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes by concurrent crimes as prescribed in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [the aggravated punishment shall be limited to the sum of the long-term punishments of the above two crimes];

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, despite the fact that the defendant had been punished seven times for traffic-related crimes, such as drinking, driving, etc., the defendant committed the crime of this case. However, the defendant is under the time of committing the crime of this case, and the defendant has no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, etc., the defendant's age is considered as favorable to the defendant.