Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

1. The Defendant is a person engaging in driving a B M& car.

On September 23, 2009, the Defendant driven a Madow on the upper 17:40 on September 23, 2009, and proceeded along the three-lane road in the 1001 Jeju Jeju Jeju Jeju Jeju Island, along the two-lanes from the 1001 Jeju Jeju Jeju Jeju Jeju Jeju Island. However, the Defendant had a duty of care to safely drive a motor vehicle with the front left by a person engaging in driving the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to drive the vehicle and received by negligence the front door part and door part of the vehicle driven by the Defendant, after the left side part of the E-city bus owned by the E-city, which is owned by C parked on the three-lanes of the above road.

Ultimately, the Defendant did not immediately stop the bus and take necessary measures, such as checking the contents of the accident, even though the repair cost, such as the attachment of a post-offender, etc., by negligence in the course of business as above, was damaged to the extent of KRW 805,000.

2. On September 17, 2009, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (Refusal to measure the noise level) (hereinafter “Road Traffic Act”), while driving a mast car at around 17:50 on September 23, 2009, the Defendant received and stopped a telegram adjacent to a G cafeteria outdoor parking lot located in F at the time of interest.

The police officer of the Silung Police Station, who was dispatched to the site after receiving a report, I saw the Defendant as smelling, and there are reasonable grounds to believe that the Defendant was driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol because he was unable to properly drive his motor vehicle, and the Defendant was driving his motor vehicle on the earth, and requested the Defendant to comply with the drinking test by inserting the vehicle into a drinking measuring machine for three times between 18:40 and 19:10 on the same day, but the Defendant failed to comply with the request for the drinking test of the above police officer without justifiable grounds.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police protocol against C, J, and K 1.