A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six 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 April 28, 2008, the Defendant is a person who violated the provisions on the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice by receiving a summary order of fines not exceeding 700,000 won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch on April 28, 2008, and a fine not exceeding two million won due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch on May 31, 201.

On March 18, 2014, at around 20:50, the Defendant driven a B gallon with blood alcohol concentration of at least 0.108%, without obtaining a driver’s license, from the section of approximately two kilometers in the middle school located in the middle school located in the middle school located in the Dondong-gu, Gyeong-dong, Gyeong-dong, U.S. in front of the Buddhist restaurant located in the Dondong-si, Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the statement of the status of a drinking driver, and the written report on the status of a drinking driver;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of a copy of the register of driver's licenses);

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports;

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 of ordinary concurrent crimes (the punishment imposed on a violation of the Road Traffic Act of heavier punishment);

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 reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant is a person who has been punished for drunk driving and again committed the crime of this case, and the responsibility for such crime is not weak.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s violation of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the sentence is determined as ordered.