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 June 7, 2013, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving), and on April 23, 2015, the Seoul Southern District Court issued a summary order of KRW 2 million as an offense of the same offense.

Although the Defendant had had a history of driving alcohol more than twice as above, on December 8, 2016, the Defendant driven a Dra car under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.095% from blood at around 03:00 on December 8, 2016, and proceeded with approximately 100 meters from the front day of the Cheongbu middle school located in 112, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu, 109 to the front day of the first apartment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Report on the circumstances of driving under the liquor:

1. Inquiries about the results of crackdown on drinking driving;

1. Previous conviction: References to inquiries, investigation reports (the confirmation of the past record of the same kind of crime), and copies of summary order attached thereto; and

1. Relevant Article of the Act and Articles 148-2 (1) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the order of provisional payment was that the Defendant had the same criminal history of two times, but under the influence of alcohol, driving a vehicle at the same time, and the nature of the crime was very low. However, the Defendant was determined as above by taking into account the following circumstances such as the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation, environment, family relation, etc., even though the Defendant had been in the vicinity of his house after drinking alcohol, but he was in the vicinity of his house through his substitute driver, and returned to the Defendant who was not a substitute driver, and had him drive a vehicle to return home in a locking, and then he was at a disadvantage in the workplace of this case, he was at a disadvantage of retired from the workplace of this case, the driving distance was short, the alcohol concentration level was relatively low, and the blood alcohol concentration was divided later, and then the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation, and family relation was changed.