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

On November 19, 2013, at around 00:40, the Defendant driven a car with approximately one kilometer Di40 km while under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.119% from his own house located in Busan Northern-gu, Busan to the front of the same Kucheon-dong public parking lot.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to reports on the statement of the status of the driver, requests for appraisal, requests for appraisal, and reports on the replacement of the driver;

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines for criminal facts, and the selection of fines;

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

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserts that, in the course of collecting blood for the purpose of measuring the blood alcohol concentration, the Defendant’s blood has been contaminated since the plant is used by species other than the species of non- alcohol and thus, it is difficult to believe the values measured from blood collection

Considering the circumstances that, in the case of a measurement by a respiratory tester, there may be problems with the accuracy and reliability of the measurement result based on the condition of the measuring instrument, measuring method, and degree of cooperation of the other party, deeming that the blood testing level as a result of a blood testing is more adjacent to the blood alcohol concentration as at the time of the measurement, unless there are special circumstances that make it difficult to believe the result of the measurement by artificial manipulation or interference with the related party during the collection or examination process, such as artificial manipulation or interference by the person concerned, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6905 delivered on February 13, 2004). According to the witness E’s testimony, according to the Defendant’s blood gathering request, the police officer collected the skin after disinfecting the skin using the shotidine used as non- alcohols paid by the police officer upon the Defendant’s blood gathering request, and the fact that he/she used the species of alcohol for yeast in extracting yeast after collecting blood can be acknowledged.

The head of the plant shall use the species of alcohol before blood collection.