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

On February 21, 2018, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 3 million by the Suwon District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

On July 4, 2020, the Defendant, at around 22:35, operated a DNA lurged vehicle with a blood alcohol content of about 0.174% from the 4km section from the B underground parking lot to the roads in front of the same city, in the state of under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.174%, and operated the violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, investigation report, notification of the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and inquiry into the results of crackdown;

1. Records of judgment: Application of one copy of criminal records, reply note, and summary order;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty for a crime;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground of sentencing of the provisional payment order is that the defendant, who has a record of driving a drunk, drives a motor vehicle again, and the nature of the crime is not less than that of the crime, but the result of the blood alcohol concentration due to drinking in this case is higher.

Since the Defendant was punished as a drunk driving in February 2018, and two years and six months have not passed since he was punished as a drunk driving in February 2018, there is a lot of possibility of criticism in that he committed the instant crime again.

In addition, in light of the fact that the defendant got another vehicle in the course of driving under the influence of alcohol in this case and considerably damaged the defendant's vehicle, the driving under the influence of alcohol in this case seems to have not many risks.

However, the following circumstances are considered: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and divided his mistake; (b) the Defendant did not have any other criminal records other than that prior to the said one-time fine; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and consequence, and other circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the record, such as the circumstances after the crime.