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

[criminal history] Defendant A is a person who has been punished at least twice for a violation of road traffic law (driving) by committing a violation of road traffic law at the Jung-gu District Court on March 16, 2009, and on April 28, 2014, Defendant A was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million by the same court as the same crime.

"2016 Highest 5463"

1. On September 5, 2016, the Defendant driving a motor vehicle in the section of about 5km with alcohol concentration of about 0.137% from the 5km, while under the influence of alcohol, without obtaining a motor device bicycle license, and without being registered as the Defendant’s ownership, at around 124cc ckis, from the section of approximately 5km, from the 1st through the 926 km-ro, Southern-si, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-do, the Namyang-si, the Namyang-do, the Gyeongdong-gu, the Seoul-Eup-do, and the front day of the restaurant.

2. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Damage Compensation Act is a person holding unregistered Mazar 124cc.

No one shall operate any motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance on a road.

Nevertheless, the defendant operated the above Oral Ba, which was not covered by mandatory insurance, as described in the above 1.1.

On February 28, 2017, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol content of 0.088% in blood without obtaining a license for a motor device bicycle at around 15:25 on February 28, 2017, the Defendant driven a Otoba, driving C, and driven the two-lanes of the pattern distance from the Oba road front of the Namyang-si in the southyang-si.

A person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to safely drive the motor vehicle along with the lane by accurately manipulating the steering gear, brake system, etc.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and continued to go beyond the victim F(34) who is a pedestrian who was living at the edge of a road.

Ultimately, the Defendant is above.