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

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On April 11, 2008, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Seoul Eastern District Court on April 11, 2008, and a fine of KRW 2 million as the same crime from the Sungwon District Court's Sungnam branch on October 2, 2008.

On October 27, 2013, at around 22:43, the Defendant driven a Brentoon car owned by the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol of approximately 2 km from the subway station near the Songpa-gu Seoul Sacheon-dong to the road in front of 479, Dong-dong 479, for about 0.05% of alcohol content.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the results of the crackdown on drinking driving, and report on the situation of drinking drivers;

1. Previous records of judgment: Application of criminal records, inquiry reports, investigation reports (former records and confirmation reports) Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

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

1. Even though the defendant had a record of having been sentenced twice to a fine for the same kind of crime under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the fact that the defendant again committed the instant crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant repents his mistake in depth, that the blood alcohol concentration measured at the time was not significantly high, that the blood alcohol concentration measured at the time was not high, that there is no other criminal punishment other than the fine, that the defendant does not have any other criminal history, that the defendant's previous convictions of driving under the influence of alcohol two or more times which constitute the crime of violating the Road Traffic Act from among each of the crimes of this case, "the previous convictions of driving under the influence of alcohol" was cut down before the enforcement of the current Road Traffic Act aggravated punishment, and there is some consideration, and that the defendant again does not drive under the influence of alcohol, and that the defendant would not drive under the influence of alcohol.

The above circumstances include the Defendant’s age, character, character, occupation, and environment.