[criminal power] On April 12, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for eight months or two years of suspension of execution with labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. at the Daegu District Court on April 12, 201. On April 29, 201, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million of fine for the same crime, etc.

【Criminal Facts】

On November 21, 2014, at around 23:35, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle with low alcohol level of 0.120% under the influence of alcohol without obtaining a driver’s license from the front of the home fluor in the Daegu Northern-dong to the front road of the Library located in the same bed and located in the same Gu.

Ultimately, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, while driving a motor vehicle at the same time without obtaining a motor vehicle license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A driver's license inquiry;

1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking alcohol driving, the report on the actual state of drinking drivers, and electronic documents;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports (A), investigation reports (former records and attachment of judgment), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the judgment;

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

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the Defendant, even though he had had had had had had been sentenced several times (six times of fine, two times of suspended execution) due to drinking and non-licensed driving, again committed the instant crime. Considering the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime again from the time he was punished for the last drunk driving, and that he again committed the instant crime only for a few months, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant with no responsibility for the relevant crime.

However, the fact that the defendant reflects the crime of this case and does not repeat the crime, and that it is other than this.