A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Punishment of the crime

On June 23, 200, the Defendant was notified of a summary order of KRW 3 million as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Western District Court on June 23, 200, KRW 2.5 million, KRW 3 million as a fine for the same crime from the Goyang Branch Branch on May 7, 2003, and KRW 2.5 million as a fine at the Seoul Western District Court on November 25, 2005, and KRW 3 million as the same crime at the Seoul Western District Court on November 25, 2005. On June 9, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 4 months and 2 years of suspension of execution for the same crime at the same court on November 7, 2014, and was sentenced to imprisonment for 6 months and 2 years of suspension of execution on November 15, 2014.

On August 22, 2015, at around 07:15, the Defendant driven a D-coo motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.093% while under the influence of alcohol without obtaining a driver's license from approximately 2 km section from the front day of the Seongdong-gu Seongbuk-gu Sungdong Apartmentdong apartment to the chemical colon complex located in the same Kuwondong-dong on the same day at around 07:20 on the same day.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition clause on drunk driving at least twice, was driving a motor vehicle without a driver's license in violation of the prohibition clause.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the control of drinking and driving, and the register of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, each summary order, and application of each statute of the judgment;

1. Relevant provisions of Article 148-2 (1) 1, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, and Articles 152 (1) and 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The instant crime was repeated during the period of suspended execution, even though the Defendant had had a record of having been punished several times for the reason of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation.

It seems that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected against the defendant.

The age, character and conduct, family relationship, and family relationship of the defendant.