If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

On October 16, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 from the Ulsan District Court to a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act.

Criminal facts

At around 22:40 on May 9, 2020, the Defendant driven an EM5 vehicle under the influence of alcohol with approximately 0.035% alcohol concentration from the 300-meter section from the Do near Ulsan-gu B to the front road of the same Gu D apartment to the same Gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employer-employed driver and the circumstantial report of the employer-employed driver;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal history records, etc. and application of one copy of a summary order;

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

1. Article 53 and Article 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (hereinafter referred to as “reasons for discretionary mitigation”), which is favorable to the defendant,

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

1. Although there was a record of being punished for drunk driving prior to the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, the fact that the person committed the crime of drunk driving in this case is disadvantageous to the defendant.

The fact that the blood alcohol concentration at the time of the defendant is low, the distance for the main drinking driving is short, the risk of traffic accidents is not realized due to the crime in this case, the defendant recognizes the crime and is in depth against the defendant, and the fact that there is no particular criminal record except the criminal records in the judgment is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, such as the age, character and conduct, environment, occupation, motive and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., shall be determined as ordered by considering the whole circumstances.