When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On December 29, 2009, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act and a violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving) at the Daejeon District Court on December 29, 2009, and on December 1, 2016, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act by receiving a summary order of KRW 3 million due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) from the same court on December 1, 2016.

On December 30, 2016, at around 10:00, the Defendant was driving B rocketing vehicles with a alcohol level of about 0.166% during blood without a driver’s license at the section of about 300 meters from the 300-meter to the front road, starting from the street boomed in the East-gu, Seogu, Daejeon. Around 10:00, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.16%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking and the circumstantial report on the driver of drinking;

1. The driver's license ledger and the driver's license ledger;

1. References to inquiries, such as criminal history, reporting on the absence of a disposition, and application of statutes of the summary order issued by Daejeon District Court 2009 High Court approximately 23796;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 154 subparagraph 2 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) of the relevant Act;

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. Although a majority of the grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, considering the repeated driving of a license without drinking and the fact that drinking is considerably high in the numerical value of the punishment, the defendant should be punished strictly. However, the fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized and rebuttals, and all of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, family environment, etc., shall be determined as per the disposition.