A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On September 21, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of five million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Daegu District Court on September 21, 2012, and on April 23, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years by imprisonment for the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the violation of the Road Traffic Act, the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and the violation of the Road Traffic Act. On June 11, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months by imprisonment for the same court on September 1, 2014, and was sentenced to a summary order of seven million won or more by the same court on September 1, 2014.

On May 20, 2015, at around 16:25, the Defendant driven a B-hand car with approximately 3km alcohol concentration of about 0.096% under the influence of alcohol without obtaining a driver’s license in the section of approximately 3km from front to front of the village hall 120, which is located in the same side of the road from front of the 63-9 ( Geum-gu-gu, 641) Sinsan-si, Sinsan-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on the actual state of the driver;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records: Application of criminal records, etc. and other 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. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant was punished twice due to drunk driving, and the defendant was first punished by a fine for the same kind of crime during the period of suspension of execution. However, even though he was first punished by a fine for the same crime during the period of suspension of execution, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant as he was under the same alcohol and non-licensed driving during the period of suspension of execution.

However, it is against the defendant, and the motive and means of the crime of this case.