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

On January 26, 2010, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court's Dong Branch, and on October 29, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for the same crime at the Busan District Court's Dong Branch.

On August 29, 2016, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver's license on August 22 and 23, 2016, driven a Dbenz car in a section of about 900 meters from the way front of the euthanc road located in the Busan East-gu, Busan, to the coast guard located in the Busan Sogsan-dong.

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 convictions indicated in judgment: Reference references, such as criminal records, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal investigation reports (limited to the same 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. Although probation, community service order, and order to attend a lecture had the record of three times of criminal punishment due to a normal drinking run disadvantageous to the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine, since there is no record of criminal punishment going against the fact that the crime of this case was committed in the state of constant drinking, it is recognized that there is no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine. In addition, the driving distance is relatively short, taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances leading to the crime