If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100.

On February 23, 2016, at around 21:50, the Defendant driven a CBa car in the state of under the influence of alcohol of about 0.087% of alcohol content among blood, over a 30-meter section from the C-Wari-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-ri-si,

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of alcohol and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the report on the circumstances of drivers;

1. Article 148-2 of the Act on the Traffic of Roads and Articles 148-2 (2) 3 and 44 (1) of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

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

1. The Defendant committed a crime of drinking in this case for the reason of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, even though the Defendant had four times the record of the crime due to drinking alcohol driving, and even though the Defendant’s blood concentration at the time of drinking was very high, it is necessary to strictly punish the Defendant, taking account of the following: (a) the Defendant was deemed to have driven drinking without viewing the police officer regulating drinking driving in a 30-meter radius and was presumed to have driven drinking while under the influence of alcohol; and (b) the Defendant was presumed to have driven the instant drinking while under the influence of alcohol.

However, the fact that the defendant is against his criminal act and must support his family is favorable to the defendant.

In each of the above circumstances, the sentence identical to the disposition shall be imposed by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as shown in the records and pleadings, including the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation and environment, and the background of the instant crime.