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 April 3, 2017, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Cheongju District Court on April 3, 2017 and a summary order of KRW 1 million by the same court on April 20, 2017, respectively.

1. Around 13:12 on November 23, 2019, the Defendant driven DW125 Obaba in the state of alcohol alcohol concentration of about 2.8 km from the front of a potato restaurant in the Seocho-gu, Seowon-gu, Seowon-si to the front of the roads in the same Gu C in the same Gu from around 2.8 km to the front of the same Gu.

As a result, the Defendant violated the “Prohibition of Driving under the influence of alcohol” at least twice.

2. No owner of an automobile in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall operate any automobile on a road which has not been covered by mandatory insurance;

The Defendant operated the above Oral Ba, which was not covered by mandatory insurance, at the time and place specified in paragraph (1).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the state of state of drinking drivers, and notification of the results of the regulation of drinking driving;

1. Automobile insurance certificate:

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (report attached to the same kind of power) and statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose a sentence, Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant was significantly the defendant in that he was involved in the mandatory insurance even though he had a previous record of drunk driving and did not subscribe to the mandatory insurance in the state of drunk driving, and caused the traffic accident.