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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a Track Car B.

On February 10, 2019, at around 05:00, the Defendant driven the said car while under the influence of alcohol of 0.172%, and led the four-line roads in front of the front of the city-dong Incheon, Nam-gu, Incheon, to the shooting distance of the street hospital from the view view-based gate.

Since there is an intersection where a signal, etc. is installed, the driver has a duty of care to live well with the front vehicle, maintain the safety distance with the front vehicle, and not drive the vehicle in a situation where normal driving is difficult due to drinking.

Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant was negligent in failing to perform his duty of ex officio, and was found to have been driven by the victim C (the 27-year-old driver) driving in the front line of the motor vehicle driving by the Defendant after the motor vehicle of the victim C (the 27-year-old driver) who was in the front line in the front line.

After all, the Defendant driven a car in a state where normal driving is difficult due to influence of drinking, and suffered injury such as crypitis which requires treatment for about two weeks to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. The circumstantial statement of the employee;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Relevant Article 5-11 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Article 53 and Article 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (see, e.g., the fact that the defendant has no previous conviction in the same kind, his mistake is pened in depth, the damage result of the accident in this case is not relatively heavy, and the vehicle driven by the defendant is covered by a comprehensive insurance policy);

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (recognition of these circumstances in the front) 1.