A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

On August 27, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 4 million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Ulsan District Court on August 27, 2007, and on February 14, 2008, the same court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 8 months for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and sentenced to a suspended sentence of 6 months for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Ulsan District Court on February 14, 2008, and was released on December 21, 201 by the same court on December 21, 201 and on May 25, 201, from the parole in the Ulsan

6. 17. The parole period expired.

On September 30, 2013, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license on September 20, 2013, driven a gallon vehicle from the construction site near the Namyangsansan City in the state of alcohol concentration of 0.088%, to the road located north of the same city at the same time from the construction site near the Namyangsan city in the area of 3km to the point of 26.8km located outside the same city.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. A report on investigation;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, investigation reports (whether drinking driving power and repeated crime is conducted at least twice, and reporting at the control point of the suspect) 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. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3(3) of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant is against the defendant when committing the instant crime. The fact that the value of the blood alcohol concentration in the instant case is not high is the factor for sentencing favorable to the defendant.

The defendant's criminal records, including one time of imprisonment with prison labor and one time of suspended execution, are four times, and the defendant repeats the crime of this case during the same repeated crime period.