Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a driver of B observer car.

1. On October 23, 2015, the Defendant driven the said car under the influence of alcohol with approximately 1 km alcohol content of about 0.170% at a 0.170% alcohol content in front of Y-dong Samsung Electronic Factory in front of Y-dong Samsungdong, Y-dong.

2. The error of operating the above temporary light direction and brakes without accurately operating the above temporary light, which caused approximately four million won of the repair cost by obtaining the entrance door and fence walls of Samsung Electronic Plant from the front side of the above passenger vehicle.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. Reports on the occurrence of traffic accidents, records on the circumstances of the driver, records on actual condition, and photographs;

1. Making a report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning the facts of crime, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of sound driving), Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act (the point of causing damage by occupational negligence), and the choice of fines, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. In full view of all the circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the amount of fine in the summary order is too high in light of the fact that the Defendant’s blood alcohol content is considerably high in relation to the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for the reason of sentencing of the instant case, and the injury was not recovered in relation to the fact that the damage was caused by the occupational negligence of this case.

Therefore, the punishment is determined as ordered.