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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

On July 15, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 2.5 million won for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the port support of the Daegu District Court on July 15, 2010, and was sentenced to a fine of 5 million won for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the same court on December 7, 2012 and was punished for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) more than twice.

피고인은, 자동차운전면허를 받지 않고, 혈중알콜농도 0.176%의 술에 취한 상태로, 2014. 2. 26. 01:15경 파주시 문산읍 당동1로 44 ‘진원빌’ 앞 도로부터 파주시 문산읍 당동1로 38 ‘코리엔탈 깻잎치킨’ 앞 도로까지 약 50미터 구간에서 C 봉고 화물차를 운전하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

2. Report on the results of drinking control, and the register of driver's licenses.

3. Previous records of judgment: The application of criminal records, repeated statements, and statutes;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting the crime, and subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act and Article 43 of the Road Traffic

2. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition.

3. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

4. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

5. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

6. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act is that the defendant committed the crime of this case even though he had the past history of punishing several times due to drinking driving and driving without a license, and in particular, if a large traffic accident is likely to cause serious human damage, it is an unfavorable factor for sentencing against the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognized all the facts charged in this case and reflected in it is an element of sentencing favorable to the defendant.

Furthermore, the sentencing data, such as the age, character and behavior, and environment of the defendant, were considered equally.