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

On September 24, 2010, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Northern District Court, and on May 17, 2018, issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

1. Around 23:00 on September 26, 2018, the Defendant driven a D-hurd-hurd-hurged vehicle while under the influence of alcohol 0.189% in a section of approximately three meters of blood alcohol level at C in the southyang-si City.

As a result, the defendant has been driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol, even though he had a history of violating the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice.

2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) the Defendant driven a D-to-purd vehicle without obtaining a driver’s license at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the police interrogation of the accused;

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Report on the situation of running a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Report on the situation of operation without a license;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports;

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 (the punishment shall be imposed for a violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment);

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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the Defendant repeatedly driven a drinking alcohol even though he/she was fined twice due to drinking alcohol driving.

At the time, blood alcohol concentration is also high.

Even if a driver was driven to drive a mobile vehicle like the defendant's assertion, the risk of drinking.