Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person driving a CMW car owned by the defendant.

On September 11, 2013, the Defendant, on September 16:05, 2013, the front house in the Daegu Northern-gu D, Daegu, had alleyddle from the school, South and North middle school, to the dypology of filial kindergarten.

At this time, a person engaged in the driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents by accurately operating the brake or steering gear according to the structure and performance of the motor vehicle, and safely driving the motor vehicle in a safe manner.

Nevertheless, while neglecting this, the part on the left-hand side of the Franchisa, which was parked on the right-hand side of the driver's vehicle due to the negligence, was faced with the front side of the driver's vehicle, and the damaged vehicle's repair cost of KRW 1,618,767, which was damaged by the shock, did not take any measures at all at the site after destroying the property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. A traffic accident occurrence report and a traffic accident actual condition investigation report;

1. Investigation report (For the analysis of damaged vehicle, motor vehicle booms);

1. On-site photographs;

1. Application of the written estimate statutes;

1. Relevant provisions of the Road Traffic Act and Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the selection of criminal facts;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The portion not guilty under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;

1. Around September 11, 2013, the Defendant driven a CMW car while under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.125% on the front road in Daegu Northern-gu D, Daegu, the Defendant driven the CM car under the influence of alcohol concentration of 0.125%.

2. The defendant and his defense counsel did not drink before driving the above vehicle from the investigative agency to the present court, and they did so after completing driving and return to the house, and denied the above charges.

On the other hand, the evidence as shown in the facts charged in this case is the primary driver's launch report and the circumstantial statement report of the primary driver.