A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 June 27, 2017, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act by the Gwangju District Court.

On March 24, 2020, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license on March 22, 2020, driven CAp-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p-p

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act more than twice and operated a motor vehicle without obtaining a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a summary order;

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1), Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances, etc. described in the following sentencing grounds):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on probation;

1. The Defendant, for the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, committed the instant crime again even though he/she was punished as a drunk driving. In 2017, the Defendant continued without obtaining the driver’s license after the driver’s license was revoked due to the drunk driving, and continued to maintain the state of license without obtaining the driver’s license. The Defendant is sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant on the grounds that the interval between the previous

However, in consideration of the circumstances such as the fact that the drinking water in this case was higher than other cases, the fact that the defendant had no record of punishment heavier than imprisonment with prison labor, and the fact that the defendant repents his mistake, etc., and then reduced the amount of punishment within the applicable sentencing range.