도로교통법위반(사고후미조치)등
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
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.
Punishment of the crime
[criminal history] The Defendant, at the Daegu District Court on January 22, 2007, issued a summary order of KRW 1,50,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking), and the Defendant, at the same court on February 2, 2012, issued a summary order of KRW 2,00,000 as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking) on at least two occasions.
[Criminal facts]
1. On August 3, 2017, the Defendant driven the EM5 vehicle under the influence of alcohol with approximately 10km alcohol concentration of about 0.156% from the 10km section from the 00:40 on the road traffic law to the front road located in the same military as D in the same military C.
Accordingly, the Defendant, who violated the prohibition of driving under the influence of alcohol not less than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol again.
2. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of a vehicle EM5 vehicle.
The Defendant driven the above vehicle at the border of paragraph 1 and proceeded at the speed of about 60km from the dypian distance to the dypian market.
In this case, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to prevent accidents by accurately manipulating the steering side and the steering system and by accurately manipulating the steering side and the steering system.
Nevertheless, the Defendant’s negligence of neglecting this and proceeding on the right side of the road, stated “victim H” in the victim F indictment, which was parked on the right side of the road in the proceeding, but this appears to be “victim F”’s clerical error in the “victim F,” and even if F is corrected without any amendment to the indictment, it does not seem that the Defendant’s exercise of the right of defense would be seriously disadvantaged. Therefore, ex officio correction is made.
The left side of the G observer car owned by the owner was divided into the right side of the above defendant's vehicle.
Ultimately, the Defendant’s above work performance.