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

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On July 21, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a summary order of 5 million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Jeonju District Court on July 21, 2014, and on June 28, 2019, the same court was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 months by imprisonment for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 6, 2019.

【Criminal Facts】

On May 30, 2019, the Defendant, as a person who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act two or more times, driven a DNA car with a blood alcohol concentration of about 0.134% while under the influence of alcohol without obtaining a driver’s license from the section of approximately 3km-ro 3km-ro from the front side of the Seojin-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Seojin-gu, Seoul, to the front side of the road at the same time from May 30, 2019.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of drinking control, and report on the actual state of a drinking driver;

1. Inquiry into driver's licenses;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal history records, summary order, copy of judgment, application of Acts and subordinate statutes to aid to agreement of cases;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018); Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act concerning the crime;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. The sentence is inevitable in view of the fact that there was a record of punishment for the reason of sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation, and that the trial was pending due to the drinking driving, which is the case for which the judgment in the judgment in the judgment in the judgment became final, and that the blood alcohol concentration is high, etc.

However, the fact that the defendant reflects the mistake and that it seems that it appears to have been controlled in the state where the deliberation due to the preceding drinking is not resolved, and the equality is in the case where the judgment was received at the same time as the final judgment in the judgment.