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

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

Punishment of the crime

On August 25, 2008, the defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Busan District Court's branch court.

On July 20, 2020, the Defendant driven a eschton car with approximately 200 meters distance from the front road in Yangsan City B to the front road of D apartment at the same time, while under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.084%.

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. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver;

1. Inquiry reports, such as criminal records, investigation reports (verification of the same criminal records), and application of Acts and subordinate statutes of one summary order;

1. Relevant Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

1. Articles 53 and 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation;

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

1. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the sentence as ordered shall be determined by taking into account all the circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, along with the sentencing circumstances of the Defendant.

D. Unfavorable circumstances: The defendant had been punished for a drunk driving in the past but again went to a dry drunk driving; the crime's quality is not less and more severe in light of the social harm and danger of a drunk driving; the possibility of criticism is considerable: The defendant's perception of his crime and reflects his wrongness; the distance of a drunk driving is not driving; the degree of alcohol level is not a higher level; the danger of ordinary traffic, such as traffic accidents, etc. due to a drunk driving, the defendant disposes of the vehicle used for a dry drunk driving; the defendant disposes of the vehicle.