A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

[criminal power] On December 20, 2007, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million by the Busan District Court for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. On August 30, 2016, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 7 million by the same court as the same crime.

【Criminal Facts】

On September 14, 2016, at around 05:15, the Defendant driven CA car at a distance of about 10 meters from the front of the GS convenience store located in the GS-dong of Busan, to the front of the new pharmacy located in the same Dong, while under the influence of alcohol by 0.088% without obtaining a driver’s license.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement on the circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records: Criminal records, etc. and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiry reports and investigation reports (the same type of criminal records);

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. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed on a violation of the Road Traffic Act of heavier punishment);

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (The following favorable circumstances):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Concurrent Consideration for the following favorable circumstances):

1. The fact that there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding a fine since the fact that the drinking alcohol level exceeds the fine is less than 0.1%, despite the fact that the person committed the instant crime even though he/she had a history of being subject to criminal punishment once due to the ordinary drinking driving at a disadvantage of the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, and that the punishment as ordered is recognized by the court below, by comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances leading to the commission of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc.