A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On May 30, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 by the District Court of the Republic of Korea for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking).

1. On September 5, 2020, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (drinking) driving a bicycle without registration in the state of alcohol alcohol content of about 0.168% at a section of about 1km from the front of C in the city of Mapocheon-si to E in the same city of Ma from the front of C in the city of Mapo-si to the front of E. D.

2. The Defendant violated the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act: (a) Lone Star, at the same time and place as paragraph (1), operated a bicycle without mandatory insurance policy; (b) 125cc motor device.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver who is placed in the main place of driving;

1. Inquiries about mandatory insurance as a result of regulating drinking driving;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of an inquiry letter, investigation report, and summary order-making statute, such as criminal history;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of drinking), Article 46 (2) 2 of the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act, the main sentence of Article 8 (the point of operating a vehicle with no mandatory insurance) and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act to mitigate small amount;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing in Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on the part of the Defendant was that the Defendant was driving an Oral ba that was not covered by mandatory insurance while under the influence of alcohol.

However, the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the crime, the criminal records of the defendant, the alcohol concentration level during blood, driving distance, and the interval between the previous drinking driving and the time interval between the drinking driving of this case, shall be comprehensively considered, and the sentence shall be determined as ordered.