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.

Punishment of the crime

1. Around February 21, 2019, the Defendant driven a B non-stop vehicle under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol content of about 0.126% from the 1km section from the front road to the front road of the warrant ginseng located in the same Ri, at the time of Pakistan on February 21, 2019.

2. Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bodily Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving) is a person engaging in driving a car B.

On February 21, 2019, the Defendant driven the said car under the influence of alcohol, as set forth in Paragraph 1, while driving it on February 21, 2019, led the Defendant to drive the said car on a one-lane road in the direction of the warrant distance from the right side to the right side of the math.

In such cases, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle shall not drive the motor vehicle in a state where it is difficult to drive the motor vehicle normally due to influence of drinking or drugs, and there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by properly manipulating the steering gear and properly manipulating the steering gear.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, was negligent in driving a vehicle while normal driving is difficult due to the influence of alcohol, received the left-hand side part of the Eropis car that was parked on the side of the same, with the back-hand part of the Eropis car as the front-hand part of the car.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim F (the age of 55) who was seated in the driver's seat of the said car due to the above occupational negligence, such as fluoral salt, for about two weeks in need of treatment.

3. The Defendant did not immediately stop and take necessary measures at the time and place specified in paragraph (2) and at the time and place specified in paragraph (2) of this Article, even though the repair cost of the Rodice vehicle E, which is owned by G, damaged by the victim’s G, to have an amount equivalent to KRW 1,376,439.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1.Each police with respect to F and G.