Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant: (a) driven a D-A-D car with a alcohol content of 0.123% in blood; (b) driven a car at the front street located in the Gansi District E in Gyeonggi-do on November 14, 2016, around 23:54, a summary of the evidence that the Defendant driven a car at approximately 3m or 4m in the upper street located in the Gansi District E in Gyeonggi-do.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A written statement;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of drinking, the statement of the circumstances of driving of drinking, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes of the next time;

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

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

1. Determination on the assertion by the Defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Summary of the assertion

A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant had the Defendant drive a vehicle at the request of the other party borrower who requested the Defendant to move his vehicle, because the Defendant interfered with the entry and parking of the F vehicle at the time of the instant case, there was no intention to drive a vehicle.

B. Since the Defendant’s front street of the vehicle driving in the instant case does not fall under the “road” as the “road” as provided by the Road Traffic Act, the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (toxicated Driving) on the premise of the transfer on the road cannot be established.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the Defendant was found to have been driving under the influence of alcohol at the request of the other party borrower. As long as the Defendant, while recognizing his state of taking alcohol, he had the intent to drive under the influence of alcohol as long as he used the vehicle according to its original method of use.

Since it is reasonable to see that this part of the defendant and his defense counsel is without merit.

B. Article 2 Subparag. 26 of the Road Traffic Act provides that “The term “driving” means “the operation of a motor vehicle on a road (including places other than a road in the case of Articles 44, 45, 54(1), 148, and 148-2) according to its original usage (including operation).”