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 history] On April 25, 2012, the Defendant was ordered to take a summary order of KRW 3 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Incheon District Court’s Busan District Court’s Vice-Support.

[2] On October 3, 2020, the Defendant driven an Ebe-style cruise vehicle under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.151% from a 30-meter section of blood alcohol level up to the 2nd floor above the 2nd floor above Kimpo-si apartment D, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, 01:35.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act at least twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. Report on the circumstances of the driver who is placed in the police interrogation protocol to the defendant's legal statement, report on the state of the driver who is placed in the police interrogation, vehicle image notified as a result of the crackdown on the driving of alcohol, vehicle type and photograph photographed vehicle driver's license register, vehicle inquiry, and mandatory insurance inquiry report (report on the state of the driver who is placed in the police and control of the driving

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Inquiry about criminal history, investigation report (the confirmation of the previous history), and application of summary order Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant legal provisions pertaining to criminal facts, Articles 148-2(1) and 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of drinking), the choice of a fine (the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of 2 million won due to driving under drinking in 2001, a fine of 1 million won due to driving under drinking in 2003, a fine of 3 million won due to driving under drinking in 201, and a fine of 3 million won due to driving under drinking in 2012, and thus, is again committing the instant crime and thus, risk of recidivism.

In addition, in light of the fact that the blood alcohol content is high at the time of the instant crime, and that the Defendant was urged by a police officer who was dispatched due to a ditch with the driver on behalf of the Defendant to leave the driver on behalf of another, and was urged by the police officer to leave the driver on behalf of another, but the Defendant neglected it and again took alcohol for the purpose of moving parking, the nature of the crime is not good.

However, the defendant is all led to the crime of this case, and the defendant was not in control by drinking driving since 2012, and the distance of driving of drinking at the time of the crime of this case is driving.