On June 1, 2006, the Defendant was notified of a summary order of a fine of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and on May 16, 201, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment for 8 months due to a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the same court on May 16, 201, and on October 31, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years for 1 year of imprisonment with prison labor for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 8, 2013.

On April 15, 2014, at around 22:22, the Defendant driven C1 ton cargo vehicles under the influence of alcohol of about 500 meters alcohol without obtaining a driver’s license from the front of a restaurant in which it is impossible to know the trade name in the defensive Dong-gu, Ulsan-gu, U.S., to the front of the luminous conference located in the same Dong, and without obtaining a driver’s license.

As a result, the Defendant, who had a record of drinking twice or more, driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and report on the situation of driving under drinking;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous convictions: References to criminal records and investigation reports (verification of facts during the period of suspension of execution of sentence) 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 ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed on a person who commits a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act due to a heavier drinking operation);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the Defendant was punished three times due to drunk driving and two times due to unlicensed driving, and the Defendant was subjected to two times due to drunk driving, but he was under two times prior to the suspended sentence, so it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant as he was under the suspended sentence.

The punishment is imposed as ordered in consideration of the fact that the defendant commits an error in depth.