On May 8, 2013, the Defendant was punished on two or more occasions as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Cheongju District Court (hereinafter “Cheongju District Court”) and a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license), at the Cheongju District Court (hereinafter “Cheongju”) on October 15, 2014, by a fine of KRW 7 million and a fine of KRW 7 million for violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license). On April 29, 2015, the Defendant was punished on two or more occasions as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving without a license). On April 29, 2015, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at 0.093% of blood alcohol concentration while driving at 0.06:3% of alcohol, from the upper end of the Cheongju Apartment apartment Complex Center located adjacent to the Cheongju-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, to the 158m upper end of the road in front of the same 150km.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking driving, report on the circumstances of drinking drivers, and the register of driver's licenses;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

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. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., a favorable one among the reasons for sentencing) was that the defendant was not subject to a criminal punishment heavier than a suspended sentence since 2009 due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act or the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. However, in 209, the defendant was sentenced to a severe punishment due to the same crime, and was sentenced to a fine twice as to the same crime committed during the period of repeated offense, even though he had the record of being sentenced to a fine twice.