On December 21, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 2 million by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court, on September 2, 2013, to a summary order of KRW 3 million by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Changwon District Court on September 2, 2013, and on February 11, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million by the Changwon District Court on February 11, 2014. On April 5, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for 8 months for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Changwon District Court on April 5, 2016.

On May 2, 2017, while under the influence of alcohol level of 0.194% in blood without a driver's license, the Defendant driven B Ethp car from the front of the main road in which it is impossible to identify the trade name in the window of Changwon-si without a driver's license to the front road of about 1k to the front road of the 154-ro 154 square meters in front of the same Gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, report on investigation (Attachment to the judgement, etc.);

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

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (the conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing as set forth below) of the Act on the Mitigation of Small Quantity is that the defendant is divided in depth into and reflects his mistake, and there are some circumstances that may be somewhat considered in terms of the motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime.

On the other hand, the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the history of punishment due to drinking or non-licenseing even before, and the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

In addition, the instant crime was committed.