However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of Bone Star Co., Ltd.

On January 4, 2019, at around 23:20, the Defendant driven the above van while under the influence of alcohol with 0.119% of blood alcohol concentration, and changed the course to the fourth line while driving the front road of D New Driving Schools at Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the front road of D New Driving Schools at the entrance of E-school from the mutually beneficial gate to the entrance of E-school.

In such cases, the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to live well in the front left and to prevent the normal traffic of other motor vehicles from being obstructed.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, did not well look at the front line while changing the front line, caused the part of the victim F (ma, 61 years old-old driving)’s Gyststa taxi car in front of the left-hand pent and the driver’s seat, etc. in front of the lower-hand line of the said Lone Star car.

As a result, the Defendant, while destroying and damaging damaged vehicles in KRW 310,088 of repair cost due to such occupational negligence, immediately stopped and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as aiding the injured.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Statement in the occurrence of a traffic accident by F, H, I, and J;

1. Traffic accident report (1) and (2) , notification on the results of the control of drunk driving, internal investigation (as to the measurement of the driver of a suspected vehicle), internal investigation report (as to the measurement of the driver of a vehicle under suspicion of alcohol), internal investigation report (as to the addition of fluor and the application of the fluor mark recognition after the suspected traffic accident

1. Determination of the assertion of the defendant and his/her defense counsel, such as photograph, vehicle inspection, and written estimate for maintenance

1. According to each of the above evidence of the application of the Ba mark formula, the following facts may be recognized:

① On January 4, 2019, the Defendant said that, around 21:46, the Defendant was “the primary drinking of a solitary beverage (e.g., wife, 17Do360ml)” (hereinafter referred to as “the primary drinking”).

The court completed the proceedings.

(2) The defendant on January 4, 2019.