A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

On September 7, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Changwon District Court’s smuggling support on September 7, 2012, and was sentenced to a fine of seven million won on May 9, 2013 by the same court for the same crime, etc.

On July 24, 2014, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license at around 19:00, driven a c1 ton cargo vehicle at approximately 100 meters in the section of approximately 100 meters from the road located in the same Ri, from the Do in front of the Do in the Southern-gun, Nam-gun, Nannam-gun, and the Do in front of the Do in the same Ri to the road located in the same Ri.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving more than twice, driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again, and driving a motor vehicle without obtaining a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement of D police statement;

1. E statements;

1. Report on detection of a drinking driver, report on the circumstances of a drinking driver, the register of driver's licenses, and making an inquiry into the motor vehicle;

1. Each report on investigation;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, etc., inquiry reports and application of court rulings and other 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 had a high level of history in the same kind of punishment, and the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he/she had committed the instant crime even during the period of suspension of the same kind of punishment, and that he/she does not seem to have any attitude to reflect his/her crime until this court does

In addition, it shall be determined by the same type as the order in consideration of the distance of the defendant's drunk driving, drinking water, the details of the detection, and the circumstances before and after the crime.