교통사고처리특례법위반등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Punishment of the crime
1. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (unlicensed Driving) by the Defendant is a person driving a vehicle B.
On December 28, 2014, the Defendant driven the said car without a driver’s license on December 28, 2014, which led to the running of the said car at a speed from the center of the central market to the center of the low-speed apartment.
Since there are many vehicles parked around the residential area as a house, the driver of the vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by reducing speed and driving safely by examining the right and the right of the vehicle.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and followed the part on the top of the right-hand part of every gner car, which was driven by the victim C(the age of 46) who was parked on the road, was shocked by the front-hand part of the Ddol car driving on the road.
As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim C, such as the left-hand dynasium, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment, due to such occupational negligence.
2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal to measure a drinking level) was demanded by the Defendant to respond to a drinking test by inserting the b7 minutes of the drinking test on the ground that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was driving under the influence of alcohol, such as the Defendant, who was driving of a bpppon car in the state of drinking at the time and place specified in paragraph (1) in a manner that the bpon car was under the influence of alcohol, from the E- Zone AssistantF of the wooden Police Station E- Zone, the Defendant 27 minutes of the drinking test (on December 28, 2014, 05: 05:21, 05:33, 05:48).
Nevertheless, the Defendant, without justifiable grounds, did not comply with the police officer’s request for a sobling test by avoiding his/her breathm in his/her breathm.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Statement to C by the police;
1. The actual condition survey report and on-site photographs;