A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

On June 2, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 1.5 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on June 2, 2008. On April 24, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to a fine of KRW 4 million for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) at the Seoul Central District Court on April 24, 2014.

On February 23, 2015, at around 01:40, the Defendant driven a vehicle owned by the Defendant in a section of about 1k from the roads of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Yang Jae-dong Mapo-dong Mapo-dong Mapo-dong Mapo-dong Mapo-dong to the roads of the Seocho-gu Mapo-dong Mapo-dong Mapo-dong Mapo-dong Mapo-dong.

Accordingly, the defendant, who violated the Road Traffic Act more than twice, was driving a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol.

"2015 Highest 3565"

1. The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of CPoter vehicles in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act;

On June 14, 2015, at around 01:15, the Defendant driven the said vehicle under the influence of drinking without obtaining a driver's license for a motor vehicle, and driven the three-lane road of the 333-lane as Seoul Gangnam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, at the speed of shot (Seoul), along the two-lane from the direction of the shot and shot (Seoul) to the shot(s).

At night, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle is prohibited from driving the motor vehicle by accurately manipulating the steering gear, brake system, etc. of the motor vehicle and causing any danger and injury to others, and there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by driving the motor vehicle safely by making it safe.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not properly look at the front side of the e-ray vehicle, which was driven by the victim D (year 31) who was in the atmosphere of the signal prior to the e-motor vehicle due to negligence, and received the back part of the e-rayer in front of the right side of the cargo vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant’s occupational negligence requires approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim.