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

[Power of violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act] The Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 4 million at the Gwangju District Court on May 29, 2018 due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

On May 26, 2020, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license at around 21:30 on May 26, 2020, driven an Eststun car from approximately 100 meters from the front of the “C” restaurant in Seo-gu, Gwangju to the front of the housing located in the same Gu, while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.065%.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice and operated a motor vehicle without obtaining a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The register of driver's licenses made after checking the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a summary order;

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

1. Selection of an alternative imprisonment with prison labor under Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances, etc. described in the following sentencing grounds):

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

1. The Defendant, on the grounds of sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, committed the instant crime again even though he/she was punished once due to a drunk driving in violation of Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, and twice due to the previous drunk driving, and the period of the instant crime is not much distance between the previous conviction and the date of the instant crime, and the Defendant’s intent to observe the law is weak, such as registration of a vehicle after the driver’s license was revoked in 2018. As such, the Defendant is sentenced to imprisonment.

However, it cannot be seen that the drinking water of this case is higher than other cases, and there is no power that the defendant was punished with imprisonment or more severe punishment.