On September 23, 2017, the Defendant driven D cargo vehicles under the influence of alcohol content of 0.205% while under the influence of alcohol, without obtaining a driver's license, from around 00:37 around September 23, 2017 to around 5 meters from the front road of Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City to the front road of the same Gu C.

On November 1, 2017, from around 21:30 to 23:20 the same day, the Defendant: (a) expressed an employee’s desire to pay the drinking value at the main point of “G” operated by the Victim F (F) located on the second floor in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seoul Special Metropolitan City E-gu, “G”; (b) held a voice, fright, fright, and frien the alcohol on the floor; and (c) obstructed the victim’s main business by force by preventing customers from entering the main point of view, such as a string of the chair, entering the zone.

Summary of Evidence

"2017 Highest 3249"

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement of H and I;

1. A report on the arrest and enforcement of the case;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on the driving of alcohol, and a statement of the circumstances of the driver's license in the situation of the driver's license. "2783";

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report;

1. Article 148-2 (2) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 314 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. According to the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes committed several times, including the punishment due to driving of alcohol for the reason of sentencing, and during the suspension period of execution, the pertinent person was engaged in driving without a license and driving without a license even after the license was revoked due to driving of alcohol.

Moreover, under the influence of alcohol and non-license, this case's business interference was prevented under the influence of alcohol.

Considering these circumstances, this situation shall be taken into account.