Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 13 million.

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

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On September 4, 2007, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 1.5 million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in the support of the Suwon Flag Flag, and a fine of 2 million won for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in the support of the Suwon Flag Flag, which was rendered on August 26, 2008, and on September 18, 2014, for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) in the support of the Suwon Flag, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 10 months.

[Criminal facts] The Defendant appears to be clearly erroneous in the facts charged on March 6, 2016, around 03:55 around 04:17.

Without a driver's license, while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.13% in alcohol during blood, DWz car was driven from the Do in front of the Sinsking-dong Do in the front of the 500-meter from the Sinscopic Do in the Sinscopic City to the front of the 57-lane from the Sinscopic Do.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Notification of the results of regulating the driving of alcohol and the driver's license register;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of written inquiries about criminal history and other Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article 148-2 (1) 1 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense; Article 152 subparagraph 1 and Article 43 of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving)

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (within the scope of aggregated of long-term punishments) of the Criminal Act to increase concurrent crimes;

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

1. In light of the criminal records of the Defendant’s reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the fact that the instant crime was committed by the same kind of recidivism during the period of suspension of execution, the Defendant should be subject to strict punishment.

However, the defendant has served in good faith for not less than 10 years and has yet to support his wife and children, and when the execution of the sentence becomes effective and imprisonment for not less than 10 months is executed, it is highly probable that the defendant will be in office. Accordingly, the period of detention of the defendant (minimum).