교통사고처리특례법위반등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
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
[criminal power] On January 2, 2014, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million by the Incheon District Court for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) and a summary order of KRW 2 million by a fine of KRW 1 million on March 17, 2015 from the Incheon District Court’s Busan District Court’s Busan District Court’s Branch Branch Branch for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving).
【Criminal Facts】
The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a Party B's car.
1. At around 07:40 on June 12, 2015, the Defendant driven the said car under the influence of alcohol level of about 0.126% while the license was suspended in the area of approximately six kilometers prior to the training site for the air reserve forces in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu, Incheon, from the Do front of the border house located in Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu. to the road front of the training site for the air reserve forces in Seo-gu, Incheon.
2. Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act, around 07:40 on June 12, 2015, the Defendant 2nded a speed of about 40 kilometers a speed of about 40 kilometers a speed, depending on four lanes in the direction of the public road training site in front of the above public road reserve forces.
At the time, the above place was a day, where the direct driving by signal apparatus was controlled, and the road for entering the training center was connected to the road for entering the training center, and therefore, the person operating such a place was responsible for the duty of care to prevent traffic accidents by properly operating the steering gear and the steering gear.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this, while driving the said car under the influence of alcohol as described in Paragraph 1, and led the victim C(60 years of age) who was waiting for a direct dust signal in front of the Defendant’s running direction by negligence in the course of duty, as described in Paragraph 1, to the front part of the said car.
Ultimately, the Defendant’s negligence on the part of the above business is weak to the victim.