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 26, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court, and on July 23, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 3.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Jung-gu District Court on July 23, 2013, and on September 14, 2015, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 6 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Jung-gu District Court on September 14, 2015.

【Criminal Facts】

On August 1, 2016, around 23:01, the Defendant driven a BEE car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.156% without obtaining a driver’s license from the front of 35 Dacheon-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul to the upper road of 15 km-ro, 116, the 3rd Dok-ro, the Dok-ro, the Namyang-si, the Namyang-si, the Namyang-do.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiry into the result of the crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records: Application of inquiry reports and investigation reports, including criminal records, and 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. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act: The period of punishment for drinking or unlicensed driving is four times, and the operating distance of this case is less favorable to the defendant: The defendant is aware of the crime of this case; the defendant disposes of the vehicle of this case in his own sense; there is no history of punishment exceeding the fine; the defendant is responsible for living in supporting his wife and her children; and the defendant is responsible for living in support of her wife and her children; and the defendant's age, character, character, environment, family relationship, means and result of the crime, etc.