If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

On July 19, 2013, while the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol of 0.170% of blood alcohol concentration, the Defendant driven a ambenon vehicle B in the direction of alcohol, and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as checking damage damage by stopping the ambened part of DK7 car driving on the right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, which was parked on the front right side of the Defendant’s vehicle due to occupational negligence, while driving the amben road back to the front side of the Daejeon U.S., the front side part of the victim’s vehicle, which was parked on the front right side of the Defendant’s vehicle, with the repair cost of KRW 1,697,636.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. C’s statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to reports on detection of drivers and written estimates;

1. Relevant provisions of the Act on Criminal facts, Articles 148, 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the choice of fines for each case;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Considering that the nature of the crime was inferior to that of a fine for the same kind of reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the amount of the fine for the summary order is appropriate even if considering the fact that the comprehensive insurance was subscribed, the victim does not want the punishment, etc., and the fact that the amount of the fine for the summary order is appropriate.