도로교통법위반(음주운전)
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.
If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.
Punishment of the crime
On September 1, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Jung-gu District Court on September 1, 2008. On May 10, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of three million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at the Chuncheon District Court.
On August 3, 2017, around 02:08, the Defendant driven CK7 car under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.126% from the 1km section from the 22 Scam-ro 7 Scam-ro Gaon-ro, Chuncheon to the 3 Scam-ro 28 Gaon-ro 3 Scam-ro, Gyeongcheon-do.
Summary of Evidence
1. Statement by the defendant in court;
1. Report on the circumstances of driving at home, report on the circumstances of the driver at home, notification of the results of crackdown on the driving of drinking, inquiry, criminal history and other inquiries, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation report (verification on two-time records of driving at drinking);
1. Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, the selection of a fine, and the selection of a fine;
1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;
1. In light of the fact that the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act recognizes and reflects a crime, and that the economic situation and health status are not good, it is highly likely to criticize the crime of re-driving of alcohol even after being punished twice due to drinking. The statutory fine for the crime of violating the Traffic Act of this case is more than a fine of 5 million won, and the equity in punishment with other persons who have committed the same kind of crime is considered, the amount of fine prescribed in the summary order cannot be deemed to be excessive.
Therefore, the punishment is determined as ordered.