except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a car in the C Marty blst.

At around 02:30 on September 11, 2014, while under the influence of alcohol with 0.135 percent of alcohol content, the Defendant driven the said vehicle and proceeded with the road in front of the NAVV in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Busan, Seo-gu, Seoul. under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant, while driving the said vehicle, failed to take necessary measures, such as providing relief to the victim, who was under the influence of alcohol due to occupational negligence, committed a violation of the NA’s obligation at the front time of the front time, and due to occupational negligence during a stop as is, and proceeded, due to the shock of the Epoter, which was driven by the victim D (Nam, 36 years of age) due to the shock of the Epoter truck, thereby incurring about four weeks of treatment, and at the same time, at the same time, avoided the damaged cargo so as to repair 1,191,210 won, and immediately stop it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement by the prosecution concerning D;

1. The actual condition survey report and photographs;

1. Report on detection of, and circumstantial statements to, a host driver;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes related to the crime, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the crime;

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

1. Selection of punishment: Imprisonment with prison labor;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [within the scope of the long-term punishment for the crimes of the above two types];

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g. reflectiveness, initial crimes, agreement, comprehensive insurance coverage, etc.);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (Discretionary Reasons for Discretionary Mitigation);