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

On January 24, 2008, the defendant was sentenced to a summary order of 1.5 million won by a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court.

On December 6, 2019, at around 23:08, the Defendant driven a F Body-man car at a section of about 1k from C to the front three distance from D E elementary school located in G, the wife population B through D, which was under the influence of alcohol of 0.158% of blood alcohol level.

As a result, the Defendant violated the regulations on the prohibition of drunk driving more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement on the circumstances of a drinking driver, investigation report (report on the circumstances of a drinking driver), and records using a drinking-free measuring instrument;

1. Vehicle photographs;

1. Previous records: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes attaching the same summary order;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of fines, and the selection of fines;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, in addition to the previous conviction in the judgment of the defendant, is that the defendant was punished by a fine for drunk driving even in 2004, and it again led to the instant crime. The defendant's blood alcohol concentration at the time of the instant crime is high, and that the defendant caused a traffic accident involving cleaning vehicles at the end of the instant crime, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant appears to have the attitude of recognizing and opposing the crime of this case, and there is no other history of criminal punishment except for the punishment of fines twice due to the same kind of crime including the previous conviction in the judgment of the defendant, and the fact that there is no criminal punishment until the crime of this case is committed after being punished in 2008 as the previous conviction in the judgment of the court is favorable to the defendant.

Other factors of sentencing indicated in the records, such as the age, character and conduct, motive and background of the crime, results and circumstances of the defendant, etc., shall be determined as per Disposition.