beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[criminal power] On February 22, 2008, the defendant was sentenced to a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act at the Busan District Court, and on November 11, 2009, the same court was sentenced to a fine of KRW 5 million as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.
【Criminal Facts】
1. The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a vehicle B in the area where the defendant is driving a vehicle B;
Around 04:40 on December 19, 2019, the Defendant driven the above SpoT vehicle and proceeded at an indefinite speed along the five-lane road in front of the Busan City City C market in the direction of the camping bridge in the direction of the camping bridge. At that time, the Defendant was in a state of difficulty in normal driving under the influence of alcohol, such as the blood alcohol concentration reached 0.122%, red, ging, and un-distance, and the horses divided into horses.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, intending to take the passengers on the front side of the Defendant’s driving direction, brought the back part of the victim D(64 years old) E rocketing taxi with the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle.
Ultimately, the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle in a state where normal driving is difficult due to influence of alcohol, suffered injury to the said victim D, such as “satise chills and tensions,” and suffered injury to the victim F (30 years of age) who is the passenger of the said taxi and the victim G (20 years of age) for about two weeks, respectively.
2. Around 04:40 on December 19, 2019, the Defendant driven a B Sti vehicle under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.122% in the section of approximately 3 km from the I located in the Busan Jin-gu Busan to the roads in front of the same Gu C market.
Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.
(i) the evidence;