Around 03:00 on July 25, 2018, the Defendant driven BK5 car, which was driving on the side of the captain in Busan-gun, for a speed of about 20 km, and proceeded with two-lanes toward the front of the captain at a speed of 20 km per hour. Not only is there a Uton signal, but also is an occupational negligence where the Defendant attempted for a Uton at a two-lane, and did not look at the front line, while attempting for a Uton at a two-lane, and did not immediately cause any damage to the victim, which was driving in the same direction, with the front right part of the passenger vehicle driven by the victim D, driving in the same direction with the rear wheel part of the upper right part of the passenger vehicle driven by the victim D with the same direction. At the same time, the victim suffered any injury to the lower right part of the motor vehicle, etc., which requires four weeks medical treatment, and at the same time, the victim did not immediately destroy the repair cost, 1,417,17.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. A written diagnosis and written estimate;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

1. The point of view that the crime is committed under the relevant provision of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes: Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 268 of the Criminal Act: Article 148 and Article 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act;

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

1. Selection of imprisonment with prison labor chosen;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of quantity [the scope of recommending punishment] [the grounds for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act / [the scope of recommending punishment] No person who does not have a person subject to special sentencing] in the basic area (from August to January 6) of the first type of escape after traffic accident [the decision of sentencing] / [the decision of sentencing] of the Defendant committed the instant crime in which the Defendant was killed while driving after drinking; the Defendant had already been punished by drinking once; there was no record of having already been punished by drinking; there was no agreement with the victim; and there was a significant risk in the course of the accident and its process, the same sentence as the order within the scope of recommending punishment set