around 21:15 on November 9, 2016, the Defendant driven a math car under the influence of alcohol content of at least 0.205% in the section of about 20 meters from the 1043m to the upper end of the 1043 wood comprehensive gas, while driving a math car under the influence of alcohol content of the blood.

On September 12, 2014, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 7 million on September 12, 2014, which was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1 million at the Jung-gu District Court due to a violation of Road Traffic Act (drinking), and on November 28, 2016, the Defendant was not detained for the same offense in the same court and is currently pending trial.

On November 24, 2016, at around 20:55, the Defendant driven C Maz Motor Vehicle while under the influence of alcohol content of approximately 0.279% from the 200-meter section to the road front of the “Jindo” Gam-ri, Pyeongtaek-gun, Gyeonggi-do, to the same ri-do “One Ham Stop Point.”

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking at least twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

[2016 Highest 4961]

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the result of regulating driving of drinking alcohol (2016 highest 5531);

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Response to a request for appraisal, or a report on detection of a primary driver (the result of blood collection);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (the same type of force and confirmation of the fact that judgment is pending);

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Articles 148-2(2)1, 44(1) (i.e., self-driving on November 9, 2016) of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2(1)1, 44(1) (i.e., self-driving on November 24, 2016), and 148-2(1)1, and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act (i.e., self-driving on November 24, 2016), and choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. The grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act for the punishment of concurrent crimes are contrary to the recognition of all the crimes in this case. However, the punishment has already been imposed three times due to the driving of alcohol, and the person repeatedly commits each of the crimes in this case, and the concentration of alcohol in each of the blood transfusion in this case is very high.