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

On July 24, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 700,000 for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Cheongju District Court on July 24, 2006, and a fine of KRW 3 million for the same crime at the same court on March 2, 2010.

At around 17:30 on May 10, 2015, the Defendant driven the Eknife vehicle owned by the Defendant under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.259% under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.259%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol of partial police interrogation of the accused;

1. A survey report on actual condition, notification of the control results of drinking driving, photographs on the scene of accident, and investigation report;

1. Previous convictions: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty for a crime;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The gist of the claim is that the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, was aboard a motor vehicle with heavy inside, was able to open a window by walking along the train, and was diving by going through the bracing, and the locked person appears to have been driving a motor vehicle far away from the brac, and he did not intentionally commit an act of driving a motor vehicle.

2. Article 2 subparag. 26 of the Road Traffic Act provides that the term “driving” means using a vehicle on the road according to its original use.

In order to establish a new vehicle in parking, it is not sufficient to start the engine with the intention of using the vehicle according to its original method of use, and it is necessary to complete so-called launching operation, and it is sufficient to do so.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da30834 delivered on November 12, 199). In addition, the concept of driving includes a subjective element in light of the content of the provision, so the meaning of the act of driving is limited to the act of driving and the meaning of the person in the automobile.