A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On June 28, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to four months of imprisonment by the Cheongju District Court for the violation of the Road Traffic Act (LA) and completed the execution of the sentence on October 27, 2012.

At around 20:30 on December 5, 2013, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol of 0.146% of blood alcohol content, was driving B as his duties, and proceeds from two lanes along the two-lanes of the four-lanes in front of the CFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF, the Defendant, while it is difficult for the Defendant to normally drive alcohol, such as a red and rhiffening distance, without due consideration of the traffic situation of the former bank, took the back part of C Poter truck trucking from the front part of the said AFFF, who is the driver of the said cargo, and sustained the injury of the victim D (the 61 years old), the passenger, and the victim E and the victim (the 49 years old 2 years old son) during the given period.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Written statements prepared in D;

1. A survey report, a written diagnosis, a report on the circumstantial statement of a host driver, and a report on the detection of such fact;

1. Previous records: Criminal records, investigation reports and judgment, application of Acts and subordinate statutes concerning personal identification and confinement status;

1. Relevant Article 148-2 (2) 2, and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the crime, and Article 5-11 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes concerning the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (the point of causing bodily injury to a dangerous driving);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each sentence of imprisonment;

1. Article 35 of the Criminal Act among repeated crimes;

1. From among concurrent crimes, a motor vehicle is deemed to have been aware of the fact that a mistake of the reason for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act is divided and reflected in depth, the motor vehicle of the defendant is covered by a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, and the victims want to find the Defendant’s wife, but the motor vehicle is in the condition that the blood alcohol content reaches 0.146%.