beta
Text
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.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[Criminal Power] On August 20, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000 as a fine for a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Busan District Court Branch on August 20, 200.
【Criminal Facts】
1. Around 17:55 on May 17, 2020, the Defendant driving a B-hurbed car with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.169% around May 17, 2020, and led the two-lane road in front of the C-Wed-si, Busan to go along one-lane from the shooting distance room in the northwest Station of the Chuncheon.
In this case, there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by putting a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle on the front, left and right, and accurately manipulating the steering and brakes.
Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected such duty of care and neglected to drive in a normal state of difficulty, such as rhym, with red, walking, and rhythm, and neglected his/her duty of care, and instead neglected his/her duty of care in the front side of the Defendant, and instead did not avoid the victim D (ma, 25 years old)'s cruise car at the front side of the Defendant's collision, and received the back portion of the victim D's cruise car at the front side of the Defendant's vehicle.
As a result, the Defendant, while driving a motor vehicle in a state where it is difficult to drive the motor vehicle normally due to the influence of drinking, suffered bodily injury, such as the victim F (ma, 26 years old), and F (V, female, and 26 years old), which are the victim F (V, 26 years old), and the same G (V, 26 years old), respectively, for about two weeks of medical treatment.
2. On May 17, 2020, the Defendant violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act by driving a bhurd vehicle with a blood alcohol level of 0.169% under the influence of alcohol at the time and at the place specified in paragraph (1) of the same Article, even though he had a history of driving under the influence of alcohol, and again violated Article 44(1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.
Summary of Evidence
1. The defendant's oral statement;