A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On February 11, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 2.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Northern District Court on February 11, 201, and a summary order of KRW 3 million for the same crime at the Seoul Central District Court on July 4, 2006.

At around 21:30 on April 27, 2013, the Defendant driven a Brash car without a driver’s license, while under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.136% of alcohol level on the front of the gold set, which is located in the original city of Si/Gu.

As a result, although the defendant had the power of violating driving under the influence of alcohol more than twice, he was under the influence of alcohol without a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written report from an employee of an employer;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (a report on the confirmation of the same criminal records) 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 the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

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 reasoning for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant has a record of criminal punishment several times due to drunk driving or unlicensed driving, and that of multiple types of crimes, etc., the liability for the crime is not provided against the defendant. However, in light of the fact that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment heavier than that of suspended execution due to the same crime, and that the defendant is against the law, it is decided as above.