If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Around 23:00 on November 12, 2018, the Defendant driven an Ei30 vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with about 0.092% of alcohol concentration at approximately 300 meters from the area from C before the Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, to the front road of the same Gu D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to written circumstantial statements of a host driver;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (2) 3 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of penalty, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The dismissal part of the prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant is a person engaging in driving cars Ei30.

around 23:00 on November 12, 2018, the Defendant driven the foregoing car, thereby proceeding with the Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City F and the housing side road.

In this case, the defendant engaged in the driving of motor vehicles has a duty of care to prevent accidents by accurately manipulating the steering gear and brake system of the motor vehicle and prevent accidents.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and caused the back portion of the H SPP car owned by the victim G, which is parked in front of the building, to see it to the right side of the vehicle owned by the defendant's driving, to the right side of the vehicle damaged by the shock, and to shock the door of the victim's building.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by occupational negligence as above, destroyed each of the following items: (a) the repair cost of HSP car owned by the victim is equivalent to KRW 4,396,800; and (b) the repair cost of the victim’s inquiry of the victim’s building exhausters is equivalent to KRW 300,000; and (c) the repair cost of KRW 4,696,800 is equivalent to KRW 4,800.

2. Article 327 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the court shall dismiss the victim's non-prosecution after institution of public prosecution (Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents).