A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

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. A thief on February 24, 2013, around 21:50, the Defendant discovered the Erails at the market price equivalent to KRW 8.8 million owned by the victim D, which was parked there on the front road of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and carried out the said Rails after opening the driver’s seat of the said Rails, where the victim did not have a correction device by using the fluor in which the fluor was installed, and returning the kis attached to the kis, thereby driving the said Rails.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property.

2. The accused is a person engaging in driving of a vehicle E on condition that the accused is in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and the Road Traffic Act.

While the Defendant was under the influence of 0.241% of the blood alcohol concentration as stated in paragraph (1), he was stopped in accordance with the stop signals at the Seoul Metropolitan Government-affiliated Intersection, while driving one lane from the three-lane roads in front of 124-88, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, to the intersection of the Seoul Metropolitan Government-affiliated Intersection, while driving one lane from the third-lane roads in front of 124-88.

On the back, another motor vehicle stops in accordance with the intersection stop signal, and in such cases, there is a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by safely driving the motor vehicle, such as accurately manipulating the steering direction, brakes, etc. to those engaged in driving service.

Nevertheless, under the influence of alcohol, the Defendant neglected the operation of the motor vehicle, and failed to accurately operate the motor vehicle due to the negligence of approximately 3 meters after the aftermath of the foregoing cargo vehicle, and was driven by the victim F.F.(31) who was waiting for the signal behind the foregoing cargo vehicle, the part of the motor vehicle fronter part of the above cargo vehicle was driven by the victim F.F.(31).

Ultimately, the Defendant’s negligence in the above occupational negligence inflicted injury on the pertinent F, such as catitis, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment, on the part of the victim H (V, 27 years of age) who was on board the said car.