Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 6,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On December 8, 2006, the Defendant is a person who violated the provisions on prohibition of drinking, such as a summary order of a fine of KRW 3,500,000 for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving), and a summary order of KRW 2,00,000 for a fine for the same crime issued in the same court on December 24, 2009.

On September 16, 2015, the Defendant written indictment of about 500 meters from the front of the drinking road located in the Sinwon-si, Sinwon-si to the front of each side of the same Gu to the road of about 12-1:0 meters from each side of the same Gu. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant was driving beyond 50 meters “the driving distance recognized in the police interrogation protocol and the driver’s circumstantial statement report against the Defendant.”

In the section, 0.102% alcohol concentration in blood was driven by B in the state of alcohol.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving at home, report on the circumstances of the driver at home, and report on the results of regulating drinking;

1. Report on internal investigation (nine pages of investigation records);

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiry, such as criminal history, investigation report (report attached to the previous and summary order);

1. Article 148-2 of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the same Act concerning facts constituting an offense, the selection of a fine, and the selection of a fine;

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

1. Although the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act, despite the fact that the defendant had been punished twice due to drinking driving, there is a high possibility of criticism for the crime of this case. However, the defendant's mistake is against himself/herself and does not repeat the crime.

The penalty shall be determined as per the order, by reducing the amount of the fine prescribed in the summary order only once, in consideration of the time difference with the previous crime, driving distance, etc.