A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] The Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Busan District Court’s Branch on February 18, 2008, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of KRW 1.5 million for one year for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon District Court on September 16, 2014, and was sentenced to two years for a suspended sentence on September 24, 2014.

【Criminal Facts】

On March 6, 2015, at around 21:50, the Defendant driven CM5 cars while under the influence of alcohol of about 0.124% in blood alcohol concentration without obtaining a driver's license from the 1km section from the roads adjacent to the frighttom fright road in Seocho-si, Seocho-si, Seosan-si, to the fright to the fright to the fright to the fright to flow of it.

Accordingly, the defendant, without obtaining a driver's license, has violated the regulations prohibiting drunk driving more than twice, and has driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above regulations.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiry into driver's license and the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal history records, one copy of the judgment, one copy of the summary order, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes of investigation reports (limited to previous records of the same type and attachment 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 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. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is the criminal records committed by the defendant three times for the same crime, and the fact that the defendant drives under the influence of alcohol even during the period of suspension of execution for the same crime is disadvantageous to the defendant. The fact that the defendant does not have any criminal records, and that the sentence of suspension of execution on the defendant is expected to be invalidated is favorable to the defendant.

In addition to the above circumstances, the records and arguments of this case are shown.