1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving service of CK5 vehicles.

On December 11, 2017, the Defendant driven the said car under the influence of alcohol level of 0.081% among blood transfusions on December 11, 2017, and led the Defendant to drive the said car at a speed of approximately 50 km per hour at a speed of about 50 km in speed, from the center of the erode of the front week, instead of 232 ambro-ro, in the front city.

At that time, since the signal, etc. is a private distance intersection that operates, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents by safely proceeding in accordance with the signals to a person engaged in driving service.

Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant neglected to do so, and by negligence committed in violation of the signal on the red light, brought directly to the victim D(28 ) who driven in accordance with the two-lane distance from the front right side of the road in the direction of masting, the front part of the Echier car driven in accordance with the two-lane line (28 ) was driven by the Defendant.

After all, the Defendant suffered from the injury of the victim F (28 tax) who was accompanied by the victim D or the car of the franchise due to the above occupational negligence by approximately two weeks of treatment, such as salt, tension, etc.

2. The Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (drinking) driving a CK5 vehicle under the influence of alcohol leveling 0.081% from the 2km section of approximately 2km to the 2km-ro junch-ro 232, in lieu of the Defendant’s act of driving a vehicle in the influence of alcohol leveling around 0.081% from the 2km-ro jun-si in the direction of the so-called “Seoul-dong-gu, Seoul-do.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The actual investigation report on traffic accidents;

1. Notification of the results of regulating drinking driving;

1. Statement;

1. A written statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each written diagnosis;

1. Article 3(1) and the proviso of Article 3(2)1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act (a point of injury caused by occupational negligence) and Article 148-2(2) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts.