Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 12 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On November 29, 2019, at around 20:24, the Defendant driven a DNA car with alcohol level of about 0.255% while under the influence of alcohol level from around 600 meters to the front road of the C apartment, from the roads of the Sinnam-si, the Sinnam-si, the Sinnam-si, the Sinnam-si.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports, consent to and confirmation of collection of blood, inquiry requests for appraisal, and written reports on registration as a host driver;

1. Relevant Article of the Act on Criminal Facts, Articles 148-2 (3) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines for the crime, and the selection of fines;

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

1. In a case where the breathm measuring values by the breath measuring apparatus for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the breath measurement values by blood tests are different, the question of trust in the breathm measuring apparatus is the judge’s free evaluation of evidence selection. However, considering the circumstances where the degree of measurement by the breath measuring apparatus may be at issue with the accuracy and reliability of the measurement results based on the degree of cooperation of the other party, such as the state of measuring apparatus, measuring method, degree of cooperation, etc. in blood collection or examination, unless there are special circumstances that make it difficult to believe the result of blood collection such as artificial manipulation or interference by the person concerned during the process of blood collection or examination, it is deemed that the breathm measuring apparatus by blood tests is more adjacent to the breath alcohol concentration at the time of measurement than

(2) In the instant case, the Defendant asserted to the effect that the blood collection result (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6905, Feb. 13, 2004) differs between the pulmonary measurement result (0.185%) and the appraisal result after collecting blood, and that the Defendant considered the above circumstances as favorable sentencing factors. However, in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, it is reasonable to trust the result of blood

The blood alcohol concentration was very high at the time of the instant crime, and drinking.