However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) is a person who is engaged in driving of a motor vehicle with detached motor vehicle from B.

On December 8, 2017, the Defendant driven a hurfed vehicle with alcohol content of 0.114% in the influence of alcohol during blood at around 15:35, while driving a hurfed vehicle at around 0.114% in the influence of alcohol, and proceeding a one-lane road in front of the village in the southan-gun-gun Cuk-gun, Seoul at the hurbing village of a monthly village, and tried to see the vehicle in the opposite direction.

Since the passage of other vehicles is frequent on the road at the time, the driver's duty of care should be exercised to prevent accidents in advance by accurately manipulating the left, the right and the rear side, and the steering system of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant neglected to do so, and followed the left-hand side of the Epex of the victim D's D's D's D's drive, which was proceeding on the road by negligence, and shocked into the right-hand side of the Ajet car.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim D’s occupational negligence by causing the victim D to suffer injury, such as salt ties and tensions, in need of approximately two weeks of treatment, and the victim F, the passenger of the Scatra car, to suffer injury, such as salt ties, tensions, etc. in need of approximately two weeks of treatment.

2. On January 22, 2007, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) at a wooden branch of the Gwangju District Court on January 22, 2007. On December 21, 2010, the Defendant issued a summary order of KRW 1.5 million for the same offense, etc. in the same court.

The Defendant was driving at the 40m section of the road in front of the Southern-gun C in the direction of alcohol leveling 0.114% in alcohol level before the day set forth in paragraph 1, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.14%.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the prohibition of drinking at least twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in violation of the above provision.

Summary of Evidence

1..