A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant of "2016 Highest 4451" is a person who is engaged in the operation of a vehicle of sofurged C.

1. On September 15, 2009, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 2.5 million from the Ulsan District Court to a fine of KRW 2.5 million due to a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking), and on July 8, 2013, from the Ulsan District Court to a fine of KRW 4 million due to a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking).

On October 13, 2016, the Defendant driven the said car under the influence of alcohol content of about 1.4 kilometers from approximately 1.4 kilometers to 0.164% during blood alcohol concentration of about 0.164% from the 59 king-ro, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, Seoul-ro, 190, to the 25-20, two king-ro, 154, 154, after going through the sking-ro, Seoul-do, 59.

As a result, the Defendant, who had the power of violating the Road Traffic Act (drinking driving) more than twice, once again driven the said vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

2. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes) and Violation of Road Traffic Act (Aggravated Measures Taken after an accident) led the Defendant to drive the said car at the time and on the day set forth in paragraph 1, while driving the said car at two kings in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, into the speed from the industrial tower to the elementary school opened from the side of the industrial tower.

At the time of the defendant's frontline, the victim D(40) driving E rocketing car of the victim D(40) was stopped in the signal atmosphere, so in such a case, the driver had a duty of care to live well in the front line and properly manipulate the brake and steering gear to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant neglected his duty at the front time while neglecting his duty, and was negligent in proceeding as it is, and was found to have been in the front part of the said Astring-out car.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim D by occupational negligence as above.