[criminal power] On November 25, 2004, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 700,000 won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) at the Incheon District Court. On February 25, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 2 million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on February 25, 2009. On September 10, 2010, the Seoul Southern District Court was sentenced to a fine of 1.5 million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (Non-licensed Driving) at the Seoul Southern District Court on September 10, 201. On November 8, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license) and was sentenced to a fine of 1.5 million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving)

【Criminal Facts】

On July 17, 2013, at around 21:22, the Defendant driven a FTP car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.171% without a car driver’s license from the section of approximately 18 km-dong, Haan-dong, Haan-dong, to the front road, in light of the 18km-dong, Haak-dong, Seoul.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the drinking driving control, the report on the situation of driving under the influence of alcohol, the report on the status of driving under the influence of alcohol, the report on the status of driving under the influence of alcohol, the notification on the results of the drinking driving control, the report on the status of driving under

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries into criminal records, etc., investigation reports (former, summary order, and attachment of written judgments);

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1, Article 44 (1), subparagraph 1 of Article 152, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting the crime;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Although Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (i.e., the fact that the defendant has been divided in depth) do not impose a sentence on the defendant for the reason of sentencing, and there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as that the defendant has been divided in depth and his social relationship is obvious, the defendant has several previous departments and suspended the execution.