[criminal history] On September 23, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (dacting driving) at the Gwangju District Court Branch Branch on September 23, 2008, and on July 30, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a same crime at the same court on July 30, 2013, and on February 2, 2017, the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 24, 2018.

[2] On December 21, 2017, the Defendant driven Bribe, while under the influence of alcohol, at approximately 0.086% of alcohol concentration in blood without obtaining a driver’s license, from the front side of the restaurant of the Korea Community Center, 70-1, which is located in the 70-1 Sinpo City, to the yellow-ro 9, Dong-ro 11, Dong-ro, Dong-ro, Dong-ro, the Defendant driven Bribe, without obtaining a driver’s license.

As a result, the Defendant, who has violated the prohibition of drinking at least twice, once again driven a motor vehicle while under influence of alcohol in violation of the prohibition of drinking, and simultaneously driven a motor vehicle without a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The ledger of driver's licenses and response to requests for appraisal;

1. Records of judgment: References to inquiries, such as criminal history, investigation reports (verification of the same criminal records as the suspect, confirmation of the records of suspended execution of each suspect), and application of reporting Acts and subordinate statutes on the records of non-disposition and previous

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. After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1) of the same Act:

1. The grounds for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of amount are as follows: (a) the Defendant confessions and reflects the instant crime; and (b) the punishment for the instant crime ought to be determined by taking account of equity in cases where a judgment is rendered simultaneously with the crime of injury to which judgment became final and conclusive.

However, the defendant is the same as the judgment of the court.