Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and three months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

In Daegu District Court on November 9, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2,50,000 from a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act on November 18, 201, a summary order of KRW 2,00,000 for a violation of the Road Traffic Act on February 18, 2014, and a fine of KRW 3,50,000 for a violation of the Road Traffic Act on May 25, 2018.

Although the Defendant had been able to violate the provision prohibiting drunk driving under the Road Traffic Act more than once, on November 9, 2019, at around 03:25, the Defendant driven a vehicle with C low alcohol level of 0.088% under the influence of alcohol level of at least 0.088% without obtaining a driver’s license in the section from the 512 Do in front of the Daegu hydro-gu Suwon-dong, 201 to B.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the state of drinking drivers, and inquiry into the results of the control of drinking driving;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, replys to criminal records, application of Acts and subordinate statutes to prosecution investigation reports (power to punish sound driving);

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act dealing with the settlement of conceptual concurrences;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Although there are three times the records of punishment for driving under the reason of sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the punishment standard and statutory punishment were significantly strengthened due to the social request that eradicates the harmful effects of drinking driving, and then the current Road Traffic Act was enforced, and then the driving without a license is cut down only after the enforcement of the current Road Traffic Act, the new wall seems to have been frightencing the crackdown, and the blood alcohol concentration level exceeds the revocation standard and the risk of recidivism is very rough and highly likely, so a criminal punishment should be selected for a strict warning: Provided, That the same shall not apply to the case where the punishment of the crime is not easy, and the punishment is selected for the purpose of severe warning because the risk of recidivism is very high.