A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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 August 26, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Daejeon District Court's branch on August 26, 2008, and KRW 5 million as a fine for the same crime from the same support on the 21st day of the same month. On January 11, 2013, the Defendant driven a C-type truck with approximately 3 km from the front side of the Seocho-gu, Seosan-gu, Seosan-gu, Sinsan-si, Sinsan-si, on the right side of the restaurant, to the front side of the pentan-dong, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seosan-gu, Seoul, without the driver's license, under the influence of alcohol concentration of KRW 0.121%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on detection of drivers, mandatory insurance bureau, and the ledger of driver's licenses of motor vehicles;

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) 1, 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of driving on the market), subparagraph 1 of Article 152, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (the point of driving on the market without obtaining a license), Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the main sentence of Article 8 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act (the point of failing to purchase a mandatory insurance and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of ordinary concurrent crimes (mutual crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act due to a drunk driving and a unlicensed driving: Punishment provided for in the Road Traffic Act due to a drunk driving, the punishment of which is heavier, and choice of imprisonment shall be imposed);

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes among concurrent crimes as provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments of the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act as stated in the heavier judgment);

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 Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant who had been punished for four times due to the crime of the same kind as this case has already been committed and again committed the crime of this case, the responsibility is unlimited, but the defendant remains 10 days.