A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On January 10, 2019, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 5 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act from the Gwangju District Court.

On August 24, 2019, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license on August 23:20, 2019, driven Epoter cargo at approximately 800 meters from the front side of the mutual influence store located in Gwangju Mine-gu B to the front road of the “D funeral home” located in the same Gu C, while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.173%.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice, and simultaneously drive the above cargo without obtaining a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The circumstantial statement statement and investigation report of the employer (the circumstantial report of the employer-employed driver);

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: To refer to inquiries and apply 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, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed on a violation of the Road Traffic Act of heavier punishment);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1448, Apr. 2, 20

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (hereinafter “the grounds for the suspended sentence”), whichever is favorable, has been repeatedly considered;

1. As the Defendant’s reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. are seen as the first head of the criminal facts indicated in the judgment, the amount of blood alcohol concentration in a drunk driving on January 10, 2019 was subject to criminal punishment for 0.20%, and there is no longer a long period of time, and there is a high possibility of criticism in that it is not only the blood alcohol concentration (0.173%) but also the high level of the blood alcohol concentration (0.173%).

However, the defendant's previous convictions as seen above.