Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On October 6, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act at the Incheon District Court on the summary order of KRW 700,000,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act, and on August 24, 2016, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million at the Incheon District Court on the charges of violating the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

Nevertheless, at around 00:30 on October 17, 2016, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.104% during blood, driven a horse side car with a alcohol content of 0.104% during blood, and proceeded with approximately 3 km from the front day of the Maart to the 23rd road of the Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving under the liquor:

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

1. The driver's license ledger;

1. A previous conviction: A reply to inquiry, a report on the result of confirmation before and after the previous conviction of each disposition, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes attached thereto;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 152 subparagraph 1 and 43 of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed driving)

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act for the ordinary concurrent crimes (a punishment provided for in any of the crimes referred to in the above Articles and 50 shall be imposed for any violation of the Road Traffic Act with heavier punishment);

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act in the order of provisional payment is that the defendant, even though he had the record of two times of crime due to drinking driving, is not guilty of the crime in this case where he drives a motor vehicle without the driver's license of the motor vehicle. However, the defendant, who is working as an environment U.S. source, dices alcohol after leaving the new wall to solve physical and mental stress that he was under the influence of drinking, is judged to have been under the influence of drinking, and has not been in violation of other traffic-related Acts and subordinate statutes.