A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On March 30, 2012, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 5 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. at the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court on March 30, 2012, and on November 29, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime, etc.

On March 5, 2020, at around 00:05, the Defendant driven CK3 motor vehicles under the influence of alcohol by 0.145% without obtaining a driver’s license from around 24 km-gun, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-do, from the front side of the restaurant in the mutual sul-si, Chungcheongnam-do to the front side of the west-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

As a result, the defendant was driving without a driver's license and at the same time violated Article 44 (1) or (2) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the result of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Investigation report (report on the situation of running a motor vehicle at home);

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions: Criminal records, investigation reports, summary orders attached thereto, application of statutes and other relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

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 ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment prescribed for a violation of each Road Traffic Act at the time of marketing and the punishment heavier than that of a violation of the Road Traffic Act shall be imposed);

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 committed the instant crime even though he/she had a record of multiple times or punishment due to drunk driving in the past. As such, the nature of the instant crime is not good, it is assessed that the risk of recidivism is high, and it was discovered by the police dispatched after receiving a report that drinking driving is doubtful, and the distance driven in the state of drinking is very high and the distance driven in the state of drinking is 24 km.