However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Defendant A

A. On July 1, 2015, the Defendant, at around 18:30, driven a HG low-income vehicle at the entrance of a golf course at about 4 km up to the front day of the G, at the level of about 0.165% alcohol concentration in the blood alcohol level, which is 0.165% under the influence of alcohol.

B. The Defendant in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents is a person engaging in driving a Hchip car.

On July 1, 2015, at around 18:30, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.165%, and the Defendant was driving the franchise with a blood alcohol level of 0.165%, and led to the flow from the original intersection to the port of view in front of the wife G with the income population G.

In such cases, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to maintain the safety distance with the front vehicle and to safely operate it accurately, such as steering devices and brakes.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, failed to maintain the safety distance from the front vehicle and to accurately operate the operation of the operation system, led to the failure of the operation of the operation system, which led to the following panion part of the Ira vehicle in the signal atmosphere.

Ultimately, the Defendant inflicted injury on the victim J(36 years of age), who is a driver of the radar car due to the foregoing occupational negligence, such as salt, tension, etc. of the rash that requires approximately two-day medical treatment.

2. On July 1, 2015, Defendant B knew of the fact that the Defendant committed a crime corresponding to a fine or heavier punishment by causing a traffic accident as described in Defendant A and paragraph (1) on the front of the wife population G at Chicago-si, 2015. However, Defendant B made a false statement to K by a police officer who belongs to the Gyeonggi-do Police Station, which is investigating the traffic accident, that he/she driven his/her low-income vehicle and caused the criminal to escape.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Statement to J police officers;

1. Lritten statements;

1. A traffic accident report and a traffic accident report (2);

1. Accidents;