A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of CSP car.

1. On August 16, 2016, the Defendant received a summary order of KRW 700,000,000 as a fine for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Southern District Court in Seoul Southern District Court on August 16, 201, and on July 17, 2017, the Busan District Court issued a summary order of KRW 4,00,000 as a fine for a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act (driving).

On January 20, 2018, at around 14:50, the Defendant driven the spke car under the influence of alcohol content of about 0.069% without a driver’s license at a section of approximately 1km from the front of the mutual influence point in the west-gu Busan Metropolitan City, Busan, to the front of the cultural center located in the same Dong-dong.

Accordingly, even though the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act prohibiting driving of a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol at least twice, he/she again driven a motor vehicle without a driver's license.

2. The Defendant violated the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (Bodily Injury) was driving the said SP car without a driver’s license as in the preceding paragraph at the same time and place as in the preceding paragraph, and led to a two-lane road in front of the Maritime Culture Center in Busan, Daegu, Busan, along with the customary market direction from the direction of the Mat to the direction of the Mat market.

In this case, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle shall not drive a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol, and there was a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by accurately manipulating the steering and brakes and accurately.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as stated in paragraph 1, neglected the alcohol and proceeded as it is, due to the negligence of the Defendant’s failure in driving in front of the Defendant’s driving vehicle, went into the right-hand part of the victim D(59) driving car, which was waiting in front of the Defendant’s driving vehicle, and followed by the shock of the part which was boomed in front of the Defendant’s driving vehicle.