On August 13, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million due to a violation of Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in the support of the Suwon Frigwon, and a fine of KRW 5 million due to a violation of Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Daegu District Court on June 20, 2013, respectively. < Amended by Act No. 11904, Jun. 20, 2013>

[Criminal facts] On September 9, 2015, the Defendant driven a Drocketing or other vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.123 percent during blood transfusion around 00:28, while driving approximately one kilometer in the front of the 295 Song-si public health clinic, from the front day of the coal business trip in Pyeongtaek-si working at Pyeongtaek-si.

On November 9, 2015, the Defendant driven a D rocketing car without obtaining a driver's license in the section of about 40 km from the front of the luminous market located in Ansan-si, Seoyang-si, Seoyang-si, Seoyang-si, Seoyang-si, 284, to the front road of the Library, which was located at approximately 40 km-si.

Summary of Evidence

"2015 Highest 2025"

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking, statement of the situation of the driver driving, and inquiry about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: 2016 after inquiry into criminal history, etc.;

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Details of driver's license revocation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the ledger of driver's licenses;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (1) 1, 44 (1) (three-time drinking driving) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts, Articles 152 subparagraph 1, 43 of the Road Traffic Act, and the selection of imprisonment for each sentence;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. It is recognized that the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of quantity is against the defendant's intention to commit a crime and wrong, but there is a history of criminal punishment twice for the same kind of crime, and the fact that the defendant recommits each of the crimes of this case during the period of suspension of execution, etc. shall be determined as ordered in consideration of the following: