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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On October 26, 2006, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 as a fine for a violation of road traffic law (drinking driving) at the support of the Southern District Court of the Jeonju on October 26, 2006, and on December 4, 2015, the same court issued a fine of KRW 4 million as the same crime.

On June 30, 2018, around 09:53, the Defendant driven a motor vehicle with CW without obtaining a driver’s license for a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 2km from the front of the sublime farm located in the Taewon-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si to the lower-class road located in the 855-gu, Hawon-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous conviction in judgment: Application of a reply letter to inquiry, such as criminal history;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act ( Taking into account the conditions of sentencing favorable to the following reasons for sentencing):

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following factors are repeated for sentencing on the grounds of sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, despite the fact that the Defendant had had been punished twice due to drinking driving and twice due to non-licenseless driving, again led to the instant crime. The Defendant’s blood alcohol concentration relatively high at the time of the instant crime is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant is against the defendant, there is no criminal record other than the fine, the fact that the defendant is currently being treated due to the organ erosion, etc., considering the circumstances favorable to the defendant, and all other sentencing conditions specified in the arguments in this case.