1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months;

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

3.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person engaged in the operation of the B-to-pur vehicle.

On February 27, 2015, the Defendant driven the said car with 0.182% alcohol concentration around 16:30, while under the influence of alcohol, and came to go straight at the Mabro post office distance in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, and came to go straight at an influence level from the Dong-gu, Gwangju.

However, since there is an intersection where signal apparatus is installed, the driver had a duty of care to prevent accidents, prevent accidents, and operate safely.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not find out that the Defendant was under the stop according to the stop signal while entering the intersection while he neglected such duty of care while drunkly entering the intersection. However, the Defendant was in the front part of the Aburged vehicle driven by the Defendant, which was the front part of the Aburged vehicle driven by the said victim, with the front part of the Aburged vehicle driven by the said victim.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered, by negligence in the above occupational negligence, the victim C and the victim E (year 25) who is the passenger of the victimized vehicle, the “infection, tension,” etc. requiring approximately two weeks medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement of C and E;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to traffic accident reports, on-site photographs, circumstantial statements of a host driver, reports on detection of a host driver, and medical certificates;

1. Article 3 (1), the proviso of Article 3 (2) and Article 3 (8) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 148-2 (2) 2 and Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

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

1. As to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Alternative Traffic Accidents, imprisonment without prison labor and imprisonment with prison labor for the violation of the Road Traffic Act shall be chosen;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2 and (2), and Article 50 of the Criminal Act shall apply mutatis mutandis;