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

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 27, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of three million won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the Busan District Court's Branch on May 27, 2008, and a fine of three million won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the above court on July 28, 2008, and a fine of three million won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on June 15, 201.

On October 26, 2013, around 23:50 on October 26, 2013, the Defendant driven B knche vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of 0.070% without a driver’s license from the front of the restaurant of “bank trees” from Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the road of approximately 2km to the front of the 1103 Dae-dong, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government.

Accordingly, the Defendant, who had driven a motor vehicle on more than two occasions, was driving the motor vehicle without a driver's license under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on criminal records, etc.;

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

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed for a violation of the Road Traffic Act heavier than that of a punishment);

1. Selection of an alternative imprisonment with prison labor (including not only the past record of driving on the market, but also the past record of being punished by a fine for driving on three occasions before 2006, and the fact that a person does not comply with measurement at the time of drinking control and runs away;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation ( Taking into consideration the fact that the defendant reflects his/her wrong conduct and that he/she has no record of punishment of imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment for the same kind of crime);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Discretionary Reasons for Discretionary Mitigation);

1. It is so decided as per Disposition for the reason of not less than Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;