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

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

[criminal history] On July 10, 2009, the Defendant was issued a summary order of KRW 500,000,000 as a crime of violating road traffic law at the Seoul Western District Court, and on June 9, 2016, issued a summary order of KRW 3 million as a fine for the same crime from the Hongsung Branch of the Daejeon District Court.

[Criminal facts]

1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a car with a vehicle B in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

On October 28, 2017, the Defendant driven the said car under the influence of alcohol content of 0.094% in blood around 18:40 on October 28, 2017, and driven it along the two-lanes from the direction of one set to two-lanes in the direction of one side of one set, namely, a small distance near the direction of 1447.

At the time of night, the view was kept in the state of night and it was a three-distance intersection. In such a case, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by safely driving a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle by safe driving while living well.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, received a flusium installed at the intersection due to negligence where he was unable to live well, and then received a part above the Defendant’s flusium portion above the Defendant’s driving seat of the victim C&A, which was proceeding in the same direction as the Defendant, in the first lane.

In conclusion, the Defendant, by negligence in the above occupational negligence, sustained injury such as salt, tensions, etc. of the c in need of approximately two weeks of treatment to the said C, and suffered injury to the victim E, who was on the said C driver’s car, for about two weeks of treatment, such as salt, tensions, and so on.

2. Despite the fact that the Defendant had been subject to punishment twice or more due to drinking, the Defendant driven a body car with B in the state of alcohol concentration of 0.094% under the influence of alcohol at the time and at the place specified in paragraph 1, as seen above.

(i) the evidence;