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.

Punishment of the crime

1. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in the duty of driving the Damp vans in violation of the Road Traffic Act and the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

No one shall operate any motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance on a road.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, at around 23:00 on October 13, 2018, driven the above vans without mandatory insurance with drinking alcohol, and led the Defendant to proceed to E from the side of the Pyeongtaek-gun of Gangwon-gu by driving the said vans.

At the time, there were vehicles parked on the road side with a densely-populated alley, so there was a duty of care to see the right and the right and the right of the driver of the vehicle, and to accurately operate the steering and steering system and to prevent accidents in advance by operating it accurately and safely.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected to do so and proceeds as it is in a opposite way.

The part of the victim F's G Tlluri car owned by the victim F, which was parked on the road, was placed in front of the left-hand side of the said passenger car, as the top-hand part of the said passenger car.

After all, the Defendant damaged the victim's car to the extent that the amount of approximately KRW 6,642,350 of the repair cost, and driving a van which is not covered by mandatory insurance.

2. The Defendant was demanded to respond to a drinking test in order to verify whether the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol on the grounds that there are reasonable grounds to recognize that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, such as the time and time as stated in paragraph (1), and the place specified in paragraph (1) and the circumstances leading up to the H district of the Pyeongtaek Police Station H district, etc. called out after receiving a 112 report, and that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol, and that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received a demand for a drinking test from around 23:10 on October 13, 2018 to around 23:25 on four occasions, but did not comply with the drinking test by a police officer without justifiable grounds.