The Defendant is a person engaging in driving a vehicle QM5 vehicle.

On November 1, 2014, the Defendant driven the said car with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.077% 0.07% around 12:05, and led the Defendant to drive the said car at an intersection of 4-distance in front of the Hyundai Sami, Young-gun, Young-gu, Samnam-gun, Seoul, to proceed at a speed of about 80km along the two-lanes from the 4-lane boundary of the west bank.

There are four-distance crossings where signal apparatus is installed, so in such cases, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by driving the motor vehicle safely in accordance with the new code.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to proceed in violation of red signals signals and received the front part of the car driven by the Defendant as the front part of the car driven by the Defendant, which is the front part of the vehicle driven by the Defendant, by driving the victim D (In this case, 45 years old) who is facing the above intersection from the front of the agricultural museum to the front part of the car.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim by occupational negligence as above in 13:05 on the same day from the Hepo Korean Hospital located in Mapo Korean at Sinpo City 483 on the same day to the low blood relative shock, and caused the Defendant’s wife FF (F, 40 years of age) to the Defendant’s wife who was accompanied by the Defendant’s car operated by the Defendant, to suffer injury, such as pressure divers for 12 weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A survey report on the actual condition, a report on the circumstantial statement of a drinking driver, and a report on the detection of a drinking driver;

1. A death certificate of D and a diagnosis certificate of F with respect to D;

1. Whether an investigation report (whether a signal has been violated);

1. The sentencing criteria shall not apply, since the application of the law on the scene of traffic accident is of a commercial concurrent relation;

1. Article 3(1) of the relevant Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 3(1) and proviso of Article 3(2)1 and 8 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, concerning criminal facts;