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

On October 12, 2013, at around 10:12, the Defendant driven a Category C (Neow Passenger Car) passenger car under the influence of alcohol in the state of under the influence of alcohol at approximately KRW 4.3 km of the blood alcohol concentration, at a section of approximately 4.3 km from the street in the area near the water tank of the Seonam-si, Sungnam-si to the underground parking lot of approximately 14.3 km of the same Kundong-dong 14.3km.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Witness D and E’s legal statement, and witness F’s statement in the fourth protocol of trial;

1. Voluntary written consent;

1. A report on detection of a host driver;

1. Report on the circumstances of running a driving school;

1. The defendant's assertion on the circumstantial report of a drinking driver argues that it is not admissible as evidence for collection of unlawful evidence that the result of a drinking test conducted after the illegal conduct process is conducted by the defendant. However, according to evidence, ① a police officer, E, and F notified the defendant that he could refuse to accompany the police officer upon the defendant's consent, ② the defendant could have seriously refused or interfere with the police officer's request for accompanying during late night hours, but the defendant could not actively display it; ② the defendant did not actively respond to the request; ③ the defendant signed the alcohol test report or circumstantial report, and written consent of voluntary driving after the alcohol test; ④ The defendant did not put the issue about voluntary driving even when the police interrogation report was prepared, ④ the defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time, but the defendant could not have expressed his intent to accompany the police officer at the time. In light of the defendant's ability to voluntarily respond to the police officer's request for accompanying the police officer's ability to do so.