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

The Defendant is a person who has been punished for violating Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act on August 31, 2009, on the grounds that the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 5 million by the same court on April 15, 2014 due to the same crime, etc. on at least two occasions.

On December 28, 2014, at around 19:20, the Defendant driven B Poter truck under the influence of alcohol content of 0.122% without a vehicle driver’s license at a section of about 1km from around the Han River located in the opposite Dong in Jin-si, to the Han River located in the same city sub-market, around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Reports on detection of drinking drivers, reports on the results of crackdown on drinking driving, and statements in the circumstances of drinking drivers;

1. Registers of driver's licenses, and car4;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (Attachment to a summary order of the same kind of power), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a summary order;

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. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime even though he/she had been subject to punishment several times due to drinking driving, etc., the Defendant’s liability for the crime of this case is not exceptionally against the order to attend a lecture or the order to provide community service, etc.

However, there are many conditions of sentencing as shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the fact that the Defendant was committed in the course of committing the instant crime, the fact that the Defendant did not have any criminal record exceeding the fine, and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.