Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 6 million won.

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

Punishment of the crime

On August 25, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million to the Ulsan District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act, and a summary order of KRW 4 million to the same offense in the same court on July 8, 2013.

On August 18, 2020, at around 04:29, the Defendant driven CK3 car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.061% at the road section 3 meters prior to the entrance of the B apartment at Yangsan-si.

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. Written statements of D;

1. Inquirys made from the control of drinking driving, reports on the circumstantial statements of drinking drivers, and CCTV-cap photographs;

1. Inquiry reports, such as criminal records, investigation reports, and application of summary order statutes;

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

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the sentence as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, along with the sentencing circumstances of the Defendant.

D. Unfavorable circumstances: the defendant had been punished for drunk driving in the past, but again he left the same driving, and the crime was not less and more severe in light of the social harm and danger of drunk driving, and the possibility of criticism is considerable: The defendant recognized his criminal act, and the defendant was driving the vehicle in front of his residence, and the proxy engineer was driving the vehicle in front of his residence, and the proxy engineer was moving about 50 minutes from the vehicle, and he was dispatched to the vehicle after being reported by the proxy engineer.