특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(위험운전치상)
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two 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
[criminal history] On June 2, 2008, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 1 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Daegu District Court and racing support, and on August 31, 2018, the same court issued a summary order of KRW 5 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act.
[Criminal facts]
1. Although the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (drinking) on September 11, 2020, Defendant 1 driven a cargo vehicle FPoter II (PORⅡ) under the influence of alcohol concentration of about 0.278% in the 2km section from around C Community Center located in the Si-si on September 11, 2020 to the Eropos in the same city D, from around September 13:23, 2020.
Accordingly, the Defendant violated the prohibition of drinking driving under the Road Traffic Act more than twice.
2. Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) is a person engaging in driving freight vehicles FpoterⅡ (PORⅡ).
On September 11, 2020, the Defendant driven the foregoing cargo vehicle under the influence of alcohol level of 0.278% from the blood alcohol level on September 13:23, 2020, and driven the front road of the C Community Center in front of the Jeju Community Center in the racing-si at a speed of about 40km from the riverside to the north bank.
At the time, the Defendant’s cargo front-hand of the vehicle was running by HK3 while driving the Defendant G (the South and the North 63 years old). As such, the Defendant had a duty of care to safely operate the brake and steering gear by maintaining the distance with the vehicle in front and rear, properly manipulating the steering gear and operating it.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, found the victim’s vehicle in front of the speed limit and did not properly operate the brakes, neglected the victim’s vehicle in front of the speed limit, and received the victim’s vehicle behind the k3-car and the part behind the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the Defendant’s cargo vehicle.
Ultimately, the Defendant committed the above occupational negligence.