On October 8, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act on October 8, 2009, and was sentenced to six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act on March 28, 2013, and became final and conclusive on April 5, 2013.

On March 28, 2015, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol by 00:25% without a driver’s license, driven a vehicle with approximately 5 meters of 0.123% of 0.123% of alcohol level at the center of Seopopo City 62-gil 2, GS25-ro, Seopo City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous records: Application of criminal records, etc. and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions and the choice of punishment for a crime: Article 148-2 (1) 1, Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of driving sound), subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, and Articles 43 of the Road Traffic Act (the point of driving without a license);

1. Commercial concurrence: Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Selection of penalty: Imprisonment;

1. Discretionary mitigation: The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act is not only that the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime, but also that the defendant was punished for the suspension of execution three times only after 200 years for the same crime including the previous conviction such as the statement of criminal records in the judgment.

In the case of criminal power in 2009, the first instance court sentenced the sentence, but the appellate court was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for the reason that the operation of the smuggling distribution company and the family members' livelihood are difficult, and there is also a situation that the sentence was reduced by the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for the same crime for the reason that it is during the suspension of the execution period.

Nevertheless, the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of suspension of execution, and despite the fact that drinking and non-licensed driving are exposed to the high risk of good general citizens, the defendant is also the defendant.