Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On September 30, 2013, the defendant was notified of a summary order of KRW 1 million due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act in the Daegu District Court Kimcheon-gu branch on September 30, 2013.

1. On October 18, 2019, at around 04:55, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (e.g., after-accident) (i., the U.S.), driving a BKank-gu car, and driving the front road in front of the B Kan-gun of the Ganbuk-do at an irregular speed depending on the intersection from the intersection of the T.S. to the intersection of the E. T. T. B.

In this case, the defendant engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to accurately operate steering and brakes, and to prevent accidents by properly examining the right and the right of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went beyond the above road by taking a crosswalk sign installed on the right side of the running side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by occupational negligence, destroyed the crosswalk sign in the management of lurg group so that the repair cost equivalent to KRW 300,000 of the market price is to be borne, and escaped without immediately stopping and taking necessary measures.

2. On October 18, 2019, at around 05:25:25, the Defendant was demanded to comply with the alcohol alcohol measurement by inserting the vehicle in a total of 30 minutes between around 05:25 minutes from around 05:25, the Defendant, who heard the statement that “the driver of a traffic accident presumed to be a drinking driver, has fled” from the person who reported the said traffic accident, and was found to have driven under the influence of alcohol, such as smelling the Defendant, smelling, smelling, snicking on the face, etc., and making it possible for the Defendant to be found to have driven under the influence of alcohol.

Nevertheless, the defendant avoided a drinking test and failed to comply with a police officer's request for a drinking test without any justifiable reason, thereby violating the prohibition of drinking under the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

(i) the evidence;