If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On July 27, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in the original state branch of the Chuncheon District Court on July 27, 2009. On June 7, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years on October 15, 2012, and the judgment became final and conclusive on June 15, 2012.

On July 13, 2012, at around 22:10, the Defendant driven C 5 vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.129%, without obtaining a driver’s license, from the roads adjacent to the “Yeo-si,” which are located in the short-term city of Suwon to the roads adjacent to the same Dong from the 50-meter road to the wooden school located in the same Dong.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Registers of driver's licenses;

1. A previous conviction in judgment: An inquiry report, an investigation report (Attachment of a written judgment), and an investigation report (verification of recent same records) shall be applied by statutes;

1. Relevant Article 152 subparagraph 1 of Article 152 of the Road Traffic Act, Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act, Article 148-2 (1) 1 of the Road Traffic Act, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting a crime (the point of running a sound driving);

2. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (the punishment imposed on a violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment).

3. Selection of an alternative fine;

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

5. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant, who was sentenced to a fine twice due to drunk driving, once again and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years, etc. from the court on June 7, 2012, even though he was sentenced by this court on October 7, 2012, it is questionable whether the defendant's wife is more meaningful than that of the defendant, as long as he was driving again for about one month and reached this court.

However, it is hard to say that the defendant does not drive a drinking again, and it seems that he has lived faithfully without any other crime except a drinking driving.