However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a BM5 car.

At around 00:50 on May 17, 2019, the Defendant driven the said car while under the influence of alcohol of 0.0261% of alcohol concentration, and led the Defendant to proceed from the Gun Office where the D Hospital located in Chungcheongnam-gun C was granted amam.

At the time, it is night, and its location is established as a place for separation of central level, so in such a case, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by accurately manipulating the front and rear left, steering and brakes to those engaged in driving of motor vehicles.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and caused the central separation zone owned by the Administration granting the victim by the negligence of driving a full-time under the influence of alcohol as above, which led the Defendant to the front part of the passenger car above SM5.

Ultimately, even though the Defendant, by occupational negligence as above, destroyed the above-mentioned central separation zone owned by the victim to have approximately KRW 3,217,00,000, left the scene of the accident without taking necessary measures for the occurrence of the accident, such as immediately stopping the vehicle and taking relief measures, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The actual survey report and on-site photographs;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts and Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act which choose the penalty;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Circumstances unfavorable to the reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of probation and order to attend a lecture: The former and the former and the latter are two times among them, and circumstances that are favorable to the poor nature of the crime in light of the content and circumstances of the crime in this case: the fact that the vehicle can be scrapped and the latter will not stop the same mistake; the defendant's health status is not good, and the damaged central separation cost is restored to its original state.