Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 8,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Criminal facts

On April 11, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for 10 months with prison labor for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) or for 2 years of suspended sentence, and on August 20, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 3 million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the same court on August 20, 2008.

The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol content 0.084%, and around September 20, 2014, on September 20, 2014, the Defendant driven a Cknnife vehicle at a section of about 3 km to the front of the Sknife road located in the Sinju-si, Geumju-si, Geumju-si, a road located in the Gunju-si, Pknju-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

2. Inquiry the results of the drinking driving control;

3. Previous records before ruling: Application of criminal records, investigation reports (Evidence No. 7 and 8)-related Acts and subordinate statutes.

1. Relevant legal provisions, Articles 148-2 (1) 1, and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting a crime;

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

3. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is that the defendant committed the instant crime during the period of suspended execution, even though he/she had been punished several times in the past, even though he/she had the history of punishing him/her as a drinking driving or a traffic accident, and the drinking driving is likely to cause serious human damage due to the occurrence of large traffic accidents, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognizes all the facts charged in the instant case and reflects the fact that the defendant must support his/her father school student's daughter is an element of sentencing favorable to the defendant.

Furthermore, the sentencing data, such as the age, character, environment, and criminal record of the defendant, were taken into consideration equally.