The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant already issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Traffic Act on February 10, 2010, the summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, on November 1, 2010, and a fine of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act and the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving), respectively. On July 15, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and on July 15, 2011, even if the Defendant had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of 4 months for a crime of this case on July 15, 201, even if he had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of 0.11% for alcohol during blood alcohol during the crime of this case without a driver’s license, the Defendant

However, in full view of all the circumstances such as the circumstance of the instant crime and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the maintenance of the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable, as it is too unreasonable, in view of the following: (a) the Defendant’s last punishment on July 15, 201, appears to have prevented the Defendant from driving alcohol and driving without obtaining a license for driving alcohol for about four years; (b) the Defendant’s previous conviction is a case pertaining to the driving of motor devices; (c) there is a difference between the instant crime and the instant crime due to driving of motor vehicles; and (d) all other circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing revealed in the oral argument, such as the background of the instant crime

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit, and the judgment below is ruled again as follows.

[Grounds for a new judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and evidence recognized by the court is identical to the facts stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, thereby admitting them as they are in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

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

1. Commercial concurrence;