If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

On March 30, 2015, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of one million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Jung-gu District Court on March 30, 2015. On March 23, 2017, the Defendant was charged with a fine of three million won for the same crime in the same court.

From March 20, 2017 to July 7, 2017, the Defendant, even though the validity of a driver’s license was suspended, was driving, on May 30, 2017, the Defendant, from May 30, 2017 to May 21:25, 2017, a car with B low alcohol concentration of approximately 0.064% in alcohol from the 1km section to the front road of the heart Sea located in the same Dong.

Accordingly, the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle in a state of suspension of the validity of a driver's license, and even though he had been punished on more than two occasions, he was under the influence of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Inquiries about the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of written inquiries about criminal history and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

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

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act, after the criminal punishment for two drinking drivers, the Defendant again committed the instant drinking and the instant non-licensed driving. The time interval between the Defendant’s second drinking and the instant crime has not been reached for two months.

It is necessary to punish a person in accordance with the purpose of the Road Traffic Act.

However, the defendant is remarkably divided, and the alcohol concentration in blood was not high at the time of the crime of this case and the previous driving of alcohol.

In addition, the defendant's age, sex, environment, and post-crime.