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

On June 25, 2009, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in the Daegu District Court’s support on June 25, 2009, and on September 4, 2014, issued a summary order of KRW 5 million by the same court as the same crime.

On May 29, 2020, around 15:35, the Defendant driven a e-wing truck with alcohol level of about 0.036% while under the influence of alcohol level of around 17km from the front of the Gyeongbuk-gun, G, and the front of the “D” in the same Gun C, without obtaining a driver’s license, from around 17km.

As a result, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking at least twice, and at the same time, operated a motor vehicle without obtaining a driver's license.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal notice of the result of regulating driving of drinking alcohol, investigation report (report on the situation of the driver in charge), the statement report on the situation of the driver in charge, and inquiry into the driver's license register of motor vehicles and the establishment

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, and investigation status (the confirmation of suspect's previous convictions in drinking);

1. Article 148-2 (1), Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (overtake of Drinking) concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 152 subparagraph 1, and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (overtake of Unlicensed Driving);

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for commercial concurrent crimes (Punishment provided for in the crimes of violating the Road Traffic Act with more severe punishment);

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. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which has already been punished twice or more due to drinking driving, repeated the crime of drinking under the influence of a license even though the Defendant had already been subject to criminal punishment on more than two occasions, and the liability for such crime is not somewhat weak.

However, the fact that the amount of alcohol concentration in the blood of this case falls under the disposition of suspending driver's license is relatively low shall be considered as favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the records and arguments are shown in the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive for the crime, and circumstances after the crime.