A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

On November 2, 2012, the Defendant, at the Seoul Northern District Court, received a summary order of KRW 4 million due to a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and a fine of KRW 4 million in the same court on September 11, 2014, and was prosecuted for the same crime to the Incheon District Court on June 7, 2018, and was prosecuted for the same crime to the same court on November 30, 2018, and is currently pending in each trial.

Around 03:40 on January 11, 2019, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol level of 0.116% without a car driver’s license, and the Defendant was driving a Dben car at approximately 4km from the front of the Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu to the front of the Seoul Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiries into the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver, and the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. Previous records: Application of inquiries, such as criminal records, and criminal records, and Acts and subordinate statutes reporting (the fact that trial is pending);

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44(1) of the former Road Traffic Act (Amended by Act No. 16037, Dec. 24, 2018); Article 152 Subparag. 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, which provides for the pertinent provision on criminal facts;

1. Article 40 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation is that the Defendant was punished twice due to drunk driving, and even if each indictment was instituted on two occasions prior to the instant case due to drunk driving, etc. and was in each trial, the Defendant was again driving without the instant license, and thus, the Defendant needs to be punished with severe penalty corresponding thereto.

However, the Defendant’s mistake is divided into one another, and the traffic accident was not caused due to driving without permission of this case.

The defendant has been engaged in volunteer activities at a service organization for a considerable period of time, has been endeavoring to continue drinking at present, and has his wife.