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 June 8, 2012, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 3 million to a person who violates the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death or Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving), a fine of KRW 5 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (Dangerous Driving), a fine of KRW 2 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (Dangerous Driving) at the same court on January 7, 2014, and a fine of KRW 3 million at the same court on July 1, 2014 and violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

On November 23, 2014, the Defendant, without obtaining a driver’s license on November 23, 2014, driven Lone Star or Gohap in the section of approximately 4 km from the front of a dkm apartment located in Pyeongtaek-si dong in Pyeongtaek-si dong in a state of alcohol alcohol concentration of 0.126%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Notification of the control results of drinking driving, and report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver;

1. Copies of the car driving license register;

1. Records before judgment: Application of inquiries about criminal records, etc. and copies of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

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

1. The defendant's strict punishment is necessary in light of the fact that the defendant, for the reasons of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, drives a motor vehicle without a license in a considerable drinking state despite three times of the same kind of drinking driving skills, especially the defendant continuously committed drinking and driving without a license since 2012. However, the defendant recognized the facts charged in the case of this case, made the defendant not to drive a motor vehicle against his mistake, and made the defendant not to drive a motor vehicle again. The defendant's error is identical to the defendant.