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

1. On January 27, 2015, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (SP) (SP) (SP) provided that a person engaged in driving service of BK3 motor vehicles, and that, around January 27, 2015, the crossing of the private distance of the Bank from the TPP to the intersection of the two intersections from the private distance of the National Bank.

At that time, the location was an intersection without signal, and in such a case, the driver had a duty of care to live well in the front line and to operate the steering system accurately and safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by neglecting to drink while driving alcohol, failed to stop immediately and failed to take necessary measures so that the part on the right side of the victim C driver's D 1 ton of freight carried on the right side on the left side of the Defendant's front side of the passenger vehicle of the Defendant, may be damaged by the front side of the passenger vehicle of the Defendant, and the repair cost of which is equivalent to KRW 291,366.

2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Papju Driving) the Defendant driven the said vehicle while under the influence of alcohol at approximately 0.130% of alcohol level in the section of about 2 km from the Do in front of the species Papjun Don-dong Don-dong Don-dong Don-dong Don-dong, Namnam-dong, Seoul, to the parking lot for the same time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of C and E;

1. Written estimate;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. Report on the state of state of drinking drivers, and notification of the results of the regulation of drinking driving;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning on-site CCTV reports;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning facts constituting an offense, and Articles 148, 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act that choose the penalty (the point of unmeasures after accidents, the choice of imprisonment), Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act (the point of driving sound and the choice of imprisonment);

1. Of concurrent crimes, the number of concurrent crimes resulting from the crimes provided for in the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (if the punishment is more severe than that provided for in the Road Traffic Act (unnecessary Measures) shall be double crimes (within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments of the above two crimes).