However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

[criminal history] On October 15, 2010, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 3 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving alcohol) at the Seoul Central District Court. On January 25, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving alcohol) at the Seoul Central District Court. On January 26, 2015, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 7 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving alcohol) at the Seoul Central District Court.

[2] On January 10, 2017, around 04:53, the Defendant driven a D 130-car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.096% while under the influence of alcohol without obtaining a driver’s license from a distance of about 30 km-dong, Suwon-si, Seoul, to the end of the quarter of the 118km branch of the Yandong-dong, Seoul, and the 118km branch of the Yandong-gu, Seoul, and then drive a vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.096%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. E statements;

1. Arrest report, ledger of driver's license and statement in the circumstances of the driving of the driver's license;

1. A previous conviction in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and an investigation report (Attachment to the relevant summary order);

1. Driving under the relevant legal provision on criminal facts: Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 44 (1) of the same Act without a license: Subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 43 of the same Act;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. In light of the fact that the defendant's reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act leads to re-offending despite three times the history of punishment for driving alcohol, and that the driving distance in this case is the long range of driving distance, the defendant's responsibility is not exceptionally applied.

However, the above power is punished by a fine and there is no criminal history that exceeds the fine for the defendant, the circumstances leading up to the driving of the defendant, the defendant's mistake in depth is currently divided, and the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive for the crime.