A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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 August 28, 2009, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 2 million for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in the Youngju District Court’s Young-dong branch, and on June 9, 2014, a summary order of KRW 2 million for the same crime from the Daegu District Court’s Kimcheon-cheon branch.

[Criminal facts]

1. On June 11, 2017, Defendant 1 driven an EM5205 vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.131% from the 10km section to the roads front of the D gas station located in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, at around 20:35 on June 11, 2017, while driving a eM520-V vehicle under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.131% from the 10km section to the D gas station located in Kimcheon-si.

2. No person who violates the Guarantee of Automobile Compensation shall operate any motor vehicle on a road which is not mandatory insurance;

Nevertheless, the Defendant operated the EM520 V car that was not covered by mandatory insurance at the time and place specified in paragraph 1.

3. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of a SS520-V car, in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (or the equivalent) and the violation of the Road Traffic Act (or any measures not taken after an accident).

On June 11, 2017, the Defendant driven the said car while under the influence of alcohol, as described in paragraph 1, around 20:35, and driven the D’s front road of the station in Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, driving the said car into the intersection distance from the intersection of the school.

In this case, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by reducing speed to those engaged in driving service and accurately manipulating the steering direction and brakes, and by accurately manipulating the steering direction and brakes.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and passed along three lanes as it is, and thereby, ballon II as a Ggallon operated by the Victim F (55) who driven along three lanes as it is, the Defendant got the front part of the left part of the vehicle driving by the Defendant, and went ahead of the above D gas station.