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

On August 5, 2003, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1,50,00,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Jung-gu District Court Goyang Branch on August 5, 2003; KRW 3 million as a fine for the same crime in the same court on July 26, 2013; and KRW 5 million as a fine in the same court on June 20, 2014.

around 02:57 on July 14, 2015, the Defendant, as a person who had driven two or more times, driven a B SP motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with approximately 1.147% of alcohol level 0.147% of alcohol level, without obtaining a driving license, from the restaurant of the 210-Class 13 meters-3 meters-in-ro, Goyang-si, Mangsan-si to the 384-3 March 14, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on proper launch of drivers, and the register of driver's licenses;

1. On-site photographs;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal history records, investigation reports, and criminal investigation reports;

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) and subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 152 and 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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. In light of the criminal records stated in the Defendant’s ruling on the grounds of sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the time gap between the crime and the immediately preceding crime, the alcohol volume of this case, and the circumstances of detection, etc., the crime is deemed inferior.

However, considering the fact that the defendant shows a misunderstanding, the fact that the defendant did not cause traffic accidents, the fact that there is no history of punishment exceeding the fine, the health condition of the defendant, etc. as the sentencing data favorable to the defendant, and considering the age, character, character, environment, occupation, occupation, family relationship, motive and circumstance of the crime, crime contents, and all other sentencing conditions, the punishment was determined as ordered.