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

[criminal power] On February 4, 2013, the Defendant was issued a summary order of a fine of one million won for a violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Sung-nam Branch of Suwon District Court on February 4, 2013.

【Criminal Facts】

On October 23:02, 2019, the Defendant driven a E-rop vehicle with approximately KRW 500 meters alcohol concentration 0.113% under the influence of alcohol on the section of about 500 meters from the front road in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, Seoul to the front road of the same Gu Down-gu.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Reports on internal investigation and investigation reports;

1. The records of the management report, the records of the inquiry, the circumstantial statements of the drinking driver, and the circumstantial reports on the driving of the drinking house;

1. Registers of driver's licenses, chassiss, and mandatory insurance;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning criminal records and investigation reports;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148-2 (1) and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty for a crime;

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

1. A normal drunk driving that is disadvantageous to the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is a crime that may pose a threat to traffic order by itself, and may cause serious personal and material damage, such as the occurrence of a traffic accident.

Although the Defendant had a record of being punished for a fine due to drinking driving, as stated in the records of the crime record, he again committed the crime of drinking driving in this case.

At the time of the instant crime, blood alcohol concentration is high.

In favor of the favorable normal defendant, the defendant recognized his criminal liability, and shows the form of reflection.

It seems that the crime of this case did not cause a traffic accident.

There is no criminal punishment power other than criminal power in the judgment.

In addition, the motive, means and result of the crime, the character, character and environment of the defendant, and the progress of the situation before and after the crime, etc. are various conditions of sentencing as shown in the argument of this case.