A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1.5 million at the Daegu District Court on September 13, 2010, and a fine of KRW 3 million for the same crime on October 25, 2010, respectively, and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the same crime on July 14, 201, and two years of suspension of execution, and the said judgment on July 22, 201 becomes final and conclusive and conclusive during the period of suspension of execution.

On April 30, 2012, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with 0.194% of blood alcohol concentration at around 22:15, and without a driver’s license, driven a D body-wide car at approximately 100 meters away from the section of approximately 100 meters to the front road of the Maun apartment located in Daegu Northern-gu, Seoul, to the front road of the Maun apartment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on actions taken against an employer, and report on the status of an employer-employed driver;

1. Registers of driver's licenses, disqualified meetings of the main office, and car screening;

1. Inquiry reports on criminal records, etc., pre-dispositions, results of confirmation, each summary order, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the judgment; and

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. 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 labor (including the fact that a defendant who has served five times as a result of a traffic-related crime commits the same kind of crime at the same time during the period of suspension of execution);

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds that discretionary mitigation is above Article 53 and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (i.e., the defendant reflects the fact and considering the level of punishment for the same kind of criminal power);