A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six months.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On April 25, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a crime of violation of road traffic laws at the Seoul Eastern District Court on April 25, 2013, a fine of KRW 4 million for a crime of violation of road traffic laws at the Seoul Northern District Court on June 16, 2015, and a fine of KRW 4 million for a crime of violation of road traffic laws at the Seoul Northern District Court on January 24, 2017. The judgment became final and conclusive on February 1, 2017.

[2] On July 13, 2017, at around 07:15, the Defendant driven a car with C Povoon under the influence of alcohol content of at least 0.087% in blood while under the influence of alcohol without obtaining a driver’s license from the Seongdong-gu Seoul, Seongdong-gu, Seoul to the 200-ro, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, and from about 50 meters in front of the upper three-distance road.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of the driver who takes the driving of the vehicle, the record book of drinking alcohol measurement, the records of enforcement, the register of driver's licenses, pictures D and driver's licenses at the time of enforcement;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: (A) a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and the application of reporting Acts and subordinate statutes after previous convictions;

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (i.e., circumstances favorable to the defendant among the reasons for sentencing) lies in a favorable circumstance, such as the fact that the defendant was exposed to drinking alcohol driving, and the fact that the defendant recognized the crime and reflects it.

However, in light of the fact that the drinking driving had been punished twice due to the driving of drinking and three times due to the non-licensed driving, the drinking and non-licensed driving again during the suspension period due to the driving of a non-licensed driving, the drinking value of this case is equivalent to 0.087%, the potential danger of traffic accidents due to driving of drinking, equity in punishing similar cases, etc.