[criminal power] On November 30, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to four years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of death or injury at the Seoul Southern District Court on June 14, 2007, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 14, 2007, and the parole period was expired on October 3, 2010 during the execution of the sentence, and the parole period was expired on October 3, 2010. On July 5, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 7 million for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch on July 5, 2012, and a fine of KRW 5 million in the same court on September 20, 2012.

【Criminal Facts】

On June 10, 2013, at around 23:47, the Defendant driven B rocketing car not covered by mandatory insurance without obtaining a driver's license from the front of the Silung Tourist Hotel located in the Silung-dong, Gyeonggi-do, Silsan-si to the front road of approximately 2 km-ro 503, Silsan-si, Silsan-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the record of drinking alcohol measurement, the results of the control of drinking driving, the report on the situation of drinking driving, the report on the situation of drinking driving, the report on the status of driving without a license, the register of driver's licenses, the register of car car driving licenses, the car inquiry, the mandatory insurance association, the status of personal reduction and accommodation, and each investigation report;

1. Application of statutes to inquiries about criminal records, etc.;

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1, Articles 44 (1), 152 subparagraph 1, and 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts, and Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

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

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. Although there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant has a deep depth of his mistake, etc., in the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (i.e., taking into account all circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant has a deep depth of his mistake), the defendant is allowed to have the same previous department, and even within the period of repeated crime due to this previous department.