On September 5, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended execution for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Suwon District Court on September 5, 2012, and this judgment became final and conclusive on the 13th of the same month.

Criminal facts

On December 29, 2012, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license at around 04:40 on December 29, 2012, driven Gho-do car from the roads front of the Red Sea or the front road of the corporate bank in the same 540-16, under the influence of alcohol by 0.173% (in accordance with the evidence below, 0.176% as stated in the indictment appears to be an obvious clerical error) of the blood alcohol concentration of 0.173%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on detection of a host driver;

1. The driver's license ledger and each investigation report;

1. Previous records: Criminal records and the application of statutes governing the suspect's interrogation protocol to the prosecution;

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

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed on a violation of the Road Traffic Act of heavier punishment);

1. The defendant had the record of being punished for drinking driving on a multiple occasions even before the sentencing grounds for the selective sentence of imprisonment with prison labor. However, in light of the fact that the defendant again committed the crime of this case even during the suspension of execution due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, the blood alcohol concentration of this case is very high, the occurrence of traffic accidents occurred, and the victim and the victim were injured immediately after the accident, and the investigation agency denied the crime of this case, etc., the defendant's sentence against the defendant is inevitable.

However, in consideration of the fact that the defendant is likely to not repeat a crime against himself/herself, the fact that he/she is likely to care for a man or a sick person, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined as such.