Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three 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 August 22, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 4 million from the Seoul Eastern District Court for the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 4 million from the Suwon District Court for the same crime on May 30, 2019.

【Criminal Facts】

On March 20, 2020, the Defendant: (a) around 23:50 on March 20, 2020, while under the influence of alcohol level of approximately 0.181% from the front line B in Suwon-si to C, the Defendant violated the provision on the prohibition of drunk driving by driving a DK5 vehicle without a driver’s license at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of traffic accident-related person in preparation E;

1. A traffic accident report, a traffic accident report, a situation report on the occurrence of a traffic accident, a report on the circumstances of an employed driver, an investigation report, and a report on detection of an employed driver;

1. License register;

1. Records before judgment: Criminal history records, etc. and application of one copy of a summary order;

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

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

1. Selection of imprisonment or imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on probation;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order and the Order to Attend Education Criminal Act committed the instant crime again within a short period, despite the Defendant’s history of serving several times of drinking driving as stated in its reasoning. In light of the Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration, speech and behavior condition at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant’s traffic risk resulted in the Defendant’s occurrence of physical damage. Ultimately, the Defendant’s occurrence of the instant crime was disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant seems to have the attitude to recognize and reflect the crime of this case, and the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine is favorable to the defendant.

(b) other.