A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On August 23, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of measurement) in the Daegu District Court's Ansan Branch, and on May 19, 201, the same court was sentenced to a fine of five million won for a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (refluence of Dangerous Driving). On November 8, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of measurement) in the Daegu District Court's Ansan Branch, and the judgment was finalized on November 16, 2012.

【Criminal Facts】

On November 12, 2013, at around 19:44, the Defendant driven C business vehicles while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.183% without obtaining a driver’s license in the five-meter section prior to the Yong-Nam Sea State in the Taenam-dong, Taedong-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the status of a drinking driver, and the written report on the status of a drinking driver;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records of judgment: The application of Acts and subordinate statutes, including references to criminal records and investigation reports (reports on criminal records of the suspect's same kind of power and situations of habitual unlicensed driving), and documents attached thereto, previous records of disposition and confirmation reports;

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 154 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the defendant had the same record as a defendant several times during the period of suspension of execution, despite the fact that the defendant's criminal history, circumstances leading up to the crime, and driving under the influence of alcohol is a crime threatening not only to the defendant's life but also to another person's property. In light of the above, it is difficult for the defendant to be exempted from punishment.

In addition to the above unfavorable circumstances, the defendant recognized his mistake and scrapped the vehicles used for the crime of this case.