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

[Power of violation of Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act] The defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million by the Gwangju District Court on January 8, 2007 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

【Criminal Facts】

At around 07:30 on July 1, 2020, the Defendant driven a D class-III cargo vehicle from the front side of the Gwangju Mine-gu to about 1.5 km in the direction of Gwangjubuk-gu, Gwangju, with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.040%.

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A E-document;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. Notification of the control of drinking driving;

1. Previous records of judgment: Criminal records, inquiry reports, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (applicable to reports on criminal records, criminal records, and two times before and after drinking a suspect);

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty for a crime;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55(1)6 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., circumstances, etc. described in the following sentencing grounds):

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is that the Defendant, who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, once, was punished once as a drunk driver who violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act, and once again was punished as a drunk driver, so there is a high possibility of criticism.

However, considering the fact that the drinking water of this case was not high, there was a big interval between the defendant's recent years of drinking driving and the date of the crime of this case, there was no record of punishment heavier than imprisonment with prison labor, and the defendant's mistake is divided, a fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

The amount of the fine shall be determined as the order within the scope of the punishment after the discretionary mitigation is made in consideration of the above sentencing factors favorable to the defendant.