From February 18:57 to 19:00 on February 3, 2019, the Defendant driven the said car, and continued to drive the said car from around 166 km to around 156 km away from the 166-km point at the right line to the right line to the right line to the right line to the road at the same city.

No driver of any motor vehicle shall threaten or endanger any other person, or cause any danger to traffic, by continuously or repeatedly committing two or more acts, such as violation of speed, safe distance, violation of prohibition of change of course, violation of overtaking, etc., or by continuing or repeatedly committing one act.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at a speed of 110 km or more at the highest speed on a road with a speed of 110 km or more, has violated speed, has driven without securing sufficient safety distance with the vehicle in front, has failed to secure safety distance, has violated the prohibition of change of course by changing more than two lanes in consecutive ways, has violated the prohibition of passing by passing in the right direction of the vehicle in front, has committed a traffic offense, and has caused danger or injury to other drivers of the vehicle in front of the Defendant’s vehicle, and has caused danger and danger to traffic.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s defense counsel regarding the assertion of dismissal of prosecution is that driving from around 18:58 on February 3, 2019 to 19:00 among the Defendant’s act indicated in the instant facts charged was caused by a naval investigation by an investigative agency. Thus, the above part of the public prosecution is invalid in violation of the provisions of law. However, although the Defendant’s assertion alone does not constitute a so-called naval investigation which causes the Defendant to commit a criminal offense, it cannot be deemed that the investigative agency conducted a deceitful act or attack, etc., and therefore, this part of the indictment is without

(b) Innocence;