A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On January 28, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 2 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Daegu District Court Port Support on June 2, 2008.

On February 26, 2013, the Defendant driven B Poter cargo not covered by mandatory insurance in a state of alcohol level of about 0.150 percent in the section of approximately one kilometer from the Do in front of the Cheongsan-dong, Cheongsan-dong, Cheongsan-dong, Northern-dong, to the front road in front of the Central Maintenance Factory located in the Cheongsan-dong, Mapo-dong, Mapo-dong, Mapo-dong, Mapo-dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on detection of a host driver and report on the circumstances of a host driver;

1. Mandatory insurance policies;

1. Previous records: Application of inquiry reports and investigation reports, including criminal records, and Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of sound driving), 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 for each sentence;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Provided, That within the scope of adding up the long-term punishments of two crimes, aggravated concurrent crimes);

1. In full view of the circumstances such as the fact that the Defendant, in the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation, was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) at the port branch of the Daegu District Court on March 14, 2012, and the said judgment became final and conclusive and conclusive at that time, the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the fact that he/she committed the instant crime during the current suspended sentence period, not only caused traffic accidents while driving under drinking, but also driven the cargo vehicle which was not covered by mandatory insurance, and the fact that the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes even though he/she had a history of punishment for the same kind of crime.