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

[criminal power] On March 27, 2007, the Defendant issued, at the Ulsan District Court, a summary order of a fine of one million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving). On April 1, 2009, a summary order of a fine of 1.5 million won for the same crime in the same court, and a summary order of five million won for the same crime in the same court on May 4, 2016, respectively.

【Criminal Facts】

On August 7, 2020, at around 19:40 on August 7, 2020, the Defendant driven a car without a driver’s license in a state of alcohol 0.172% of blood alcohol concentration in approximately 500 meters from the front of the C cafeteria located in Ulsan-gu B to the front of the E cafeteria located in D.

Accordingly, the defendant has been driving a motor vehicle without a driver's license at the same time in violation of the Road Traffic Act more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Reporting on the occurrence of a traffic accident, a de facto investigation report, and on-site photographs;

1. An inquiry report on the results of crackdown on drinking driving, a written statement of the circumstances of drinking drivers, and an investigation report;

1. The ledger of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of inquiry reports on criminal records, etc. and investigation reports (Attachment to previous records and summary orders);

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1), Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Road Traffic Act (Punishment provided for in the provisions of the Road Traffic Act) of the ordinary concurrent crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as “reasons for discretionary mitigation”), which is favorable to the defendant, is considered in light of circumstances favorable to the defendant

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the repeated consideration of conditions favorable to the above defendant);

1. The defendant committed the crime of drinking and driving without a license in this case even though he had been punished once due to drinking driving prior to the reason of sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and the defendant committed the crime of drinking and driving without a license in this case.