Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On October 17, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years and a community service order of 120 hours in August 25, 2013 and the judgment became final and conclusive on October 25, 2013.

On October 7, 2013, at around 11:40, the Defendant driven B wre vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of 0.235% without obtaining a driver’s license from a section of about 15km in front of a bus terminal in the city bus terminal in the same Cheongsong-gun, Chungcheongnam-gu, Cheongsong-ri, Cheongsong-ri, Cheongsong-ri, Cheongsong-ri.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on proper launch of drivers, and the register of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of statutes governing judgment;

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (2) 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. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed for a violation of the Road Traffic Act heavier than that of a punishment);

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant was punished for driving under the influence of alcohol without permission even though he had the history of punishment for driving under the past and driving under the influence of alcohol without permission, the fact that the drinking water in this case is very high, and the purpose of revision of the Road Traffic Act that strengthened punishment for driving under the influence of alcohol, it is inevitable to punish the defendant.

However, the defendant recognized his mistake and is in profoundly against the defendant, and the first head's relation between the crime of this case and the crime of concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act is concurrent with the crime of violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective, deadly weapons, etc.) and other defendants' age, family relationship.