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

On January 6, 2016, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Ulsan District Court.

On October 3, 2019, at around 00:50, the Defendant driven a fwing truck under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.152% without obtaining a driver’s license from the front of the Defendant’s residence in Ulsan-gu B to the front of the same Gu C, and without obtaining a driver’s license.

Accordingly, the defendant driving a motor vehicle without obtaining a driver's license, and at least twice, violated Article 44 (1) or (2) of the Road Traffic Act.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the drinking driving control, and the statement on the state of drinking drivers;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records and summary order statutes;

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. 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. The fact that an order to attend a lecture or an order to provide community service is recognized as the reasons for sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is favorable to the accused.

On the other hand, the fact that blood alcohol concentration is high and that one time before drinking driving is disadvantageous to the defendant.

Other factors of sentencing, such as the defendant's age, environment, motive of crime, etc., shall be determined as per the disposition.