A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

【Criminal Power】 On March 31, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Chuncheon District Court on March 31, 2008; on May 21, 2009, the same court had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for one year for the same crime; and on October 19, 201, the Defendant appealed two years for a suspended sentence of six months for the same crime in the original state support of the Chuncheon District Court on October 19, 201, and is still pending in the appellate trial.

【Criminal Facts of Crimes】 On February 20, 2012, the Defendant driven D SM3 automobiles under the influence of alcohol of about 0.069% without obtaining a driver’s license, from the front side of the Kancheon apartment, which is 2,000,000, to the 372km away from the Kancheon-si, the Kancheon-si, the front side of the Kancheon-si, which is located in the Kancheon-si, the Kancheon-si, the Kancheon-si, and the Kancheon-si, the Kancheon-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the results of crackdown on drinking driving, and inquiry of the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Registers of driver's licenses, and car4;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of inquiry reports such as criminal records, etc., investigation reports (former records and confirmations of suspects), investigation reports (verification of absence of suspects' judgments);

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. In view of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime without among those who had been subject to punishment for the same kind of crime, including three times a stay of execution, the reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (hereinafter referred to as “Discretionary mitigation”), when considering the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime, it is inevitable to strictly punish the Defendant.

However, the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and means of committing the crime, including favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant's mistake is divided.