Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

(2017 Go fixed 207) On October 16, 2015, the Defendant driven a C rocketing car owned by the Defendant in the section of about 3 km to the front side of the permanent market located in Asan City Hot Spring Port, under the influence of alcohol content of 0.191% during blood around 22:00.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. A report on the circumstances of driving a drinking, notification of the results of regulating drinking driving, and inquiry of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts and the selection of fines;

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

1. In light of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Criminal Procedure Act, the statutory minimum limit of punishment for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act applied to the defendant is three million won, including the numerical value of alcohol for sentencing, driving distance, enforcement background, the criminal records of criminal punishment by the defendant, and the minimum limit of punishment for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act applied to the defendant, etc.

1. On October 16, 2015, the Defendant: (a) operated a motor vehicle owned by the Defendant, which is not mandatory insurance, on the two-lane road in front of the “E restaurant” located in ASEAN; and (b) the motor vehicle owned by the Defendant that is not covered by mandatory insurance.

2. The head of a Si/Gun/Gu may notify an offender who has violated Article 46(2) of the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation Act to pay a penalty (Article 51(1) of the same Act). Accordingly, a person who has paid a penalty is not subject to further punishment against the offense (Article 53(1) of the same Act). In such a case, Article 53(1) of the same Act is construed as “the purport that recognizes the validity corresponding to the final and conclusive judgment for payment of penalty” (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Do849, Nov. 22, 2002). According to the records, the Defendant received a penalty of KRW 40,000 on October 16, 2015 and paid it on November 3, 2015; and Defendant paid it on October 16, 2015.