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

On August 24, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1.5 million from the Changwon District Court to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act. On December 16, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 5 million from the Changwon District Court to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On October 1, 2014, at around 1:50 on October 1, 2014, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle of approximately 600 meters, without obtaining a motor vehicle driver’s license, while under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of at least 0.081%, from the front side of the Donwon-si, which is located in the Donwon-si Donwon-si, to the front road in the same Dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of the drinking driving control, inquiry into the results of the drinking driving control, and statement in the circumstances of drinking drivers;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of criminal records, reply reports, and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant statutory driving for a crime: Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act: Subparagraph 2 of Article 154 and Article 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. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances shall be considered for the reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act include not only the fact that the defendant was sentenced to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act as stated in the facts constituting the crime, but also the fact that the defendant again committed the crime of this case while having been sentenced to a fine twice due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving), etc., which are disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant's mistake is often divided and reflected in depth, and the blood alcohol concentration level at the time of the drinking driving of this case is merely a level of license suspension, the defendant has no criminal record of suspended execution or more, and the defendant's age, character and conduct, and crime are committed.