Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol on June 2, 2007 (the issuance of a summary order of KRW 1,500,000 at the Incheon District Court on July 6, 2007), driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol on December 6, 2016 (the issuance of a summary order of KRW 4 million at the Suwon Friwon method on December 19, 2016), and violating Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act on at least two occasions.

On April 16, 2018, the Defendant driven a D-do motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.132% in blood, from the section of approximately 2 km from the front of the Sin-dong Sin-dong Sin-si, Suwon-si, the Sinwon-si, Nowon-si, to the Hanwon-si road located in the 1098-1, Sinwon-si, Sinwon-si, the Defendant driven a D-do motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.132% in blood in front of the tunnel.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Reporting on the arrest of a case;

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

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

1. Records of judgment: Application of inquiry requests, such as criminal history, investigation reporting Acts and subordinate statutes;

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 of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground of the crime of this case is that the defendant, who had been able to drive a second alcohol not less than twice, has driven a second alcohol, and the nature of the crime is not less than that of the crime. The defendant, who was discovered by the driving of a second alcohol in December 2016 and was not more than three years after he was found to have driven a second alcohol, not only was driving the second alcohol in this case but also making a second alcohol in this case due to the failure to comply with the inspection for regulating the driving of a second alcohol and made the escape to an expressway

However, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided his mistake, the light of the defendant's influence of drinking in 2007 has passed since the date of the crime of this case, and the reason why the registration of the certified tax accountant is revoked when the defendant is sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment.