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

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

Punishment of the crime

On June 23, 2015, at around 08:40 on June 23, 2015, the Defendant driven a DNA vehicle while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.294%.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Report on the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver and report on the control of drinking driving;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (on-site photographs at the time of discovery of a suspected suspect);

1. Relevant Article of the Act on the Crime and Articles 148-2 (2) 1 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, which choose the penalty for the crime;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., that there is no criminal history that the defendant has committed since 1997, and that the distance from driving under the influence of alcohol is only a marb between the two meters);

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

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. On June 23, 2015, from around 08:00 to around 08:10, the Defendant driven D Poter vehicles under the influence of alcohol content of about 300 meters at a distance of 00 meters from Escirs in the Gyeong-gun B to the roads in front of the c cafeteria located in the cafeteria.

2. From the police investigation on June 23, 2015 to 08:00 on June 23, 2015, the Defendant stated that he drank 2 soldiers in Escam from Escam to Cscam, and that he dice scam scam from Cscam to 08:30 on the same day, and there is no other evidence to reverse this.

However, at around 08:50 on the same day, the Defendant was discovered in front of a restaurant, and was measured by 0.294% of blood alcohol concentration in the military police box at around 09:17.

In light of the above, even if the Defendant led to the confession of all the facts charged in this Court, the evidence alone presented by the Prosecutor is insufficient to readily conclude that the Defendant was driving at a level above 0.2% of the blood alcohol concentration during driving from Escer to C cafeteria, namely, the Defendant was driving at C cafeteria prior to the end of the week, and there is any other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.