Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

[Criminal Power] On March 28, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of a fine of KRW 3 million for the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of Measurement) at the Suwon District Court on March 28, 2008

【Criminal Facts】

On November 23, 2019, even though the Defendant was punished for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (refluence of measurement), the Defendant again driven a D QM6 car owned by himself in the section of about 5km from the front of the accommodation of C Company C, which was under the influence of 0.050% of blood alcohol concentration of 0.050%, in the same manner as the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol from November 23, 2019.

Accordingly, the defendant violated the prohibition of drinking alcohol driving or the prohibition of drinking alcohol measurement more than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstances of a drinking driver, report on the control of a drinking driving, request for appraisal, notification on the control of a drinking driving, and notification on the results of blood collection;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: The provisions of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records, US records and results confirmation;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (1), and Article 44 (1) and (2) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of fines;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Discretionary Mitigation and Mitigation Criminal Act ( considered as favorable circumstances deemed to be the following reasons for sentencing):

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, even though the defendant had been punished for the same kind of crime as stated in its reasoning, is that the defendant again committed the crime in this case, is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflected, the defendant's family members and visitors want to take the wife, the blood alcohol concentration of the defendant at the time of the crime of this case is not high, the circumstances that can be considered in light of the circumstances leading to the defendant's crime of this case, the defendant did not have any history of being punished in excess of a fine, and there is no history of criminal punishment from March 28, 2008 to the time of the crime of this case as stated in its reasoning.