Defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding seven million won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On December 29, 2012, the Defendant: (a) driven a two-laned motor vehicle B with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.244% 0.2:15; (b) driven a two-lane in front of the Southern-gun, Young-gun, Young-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City along one-lane distance from the southcheon-do, Namcheon-do, Namcheon-do; (c) driven a two-lane in front of the Namcheon-do, Namcheon-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City along one-lane distance; (d) neglected to perform the duty of care to reduce speed on the visual road; and (e) interfered with the front direction and the left direction; and (e) operated the steering and brake system accurately, thereby neglecting the duty of care to safely operate the opposite lane, thereby incurring an injury to the victim E (the victim, 48 years old), the victim F, and the victim 47 years old, with the front direction of the Defendant’s vehicle, and sustained the injury to the two-day front direction (the victim’s 2nd).

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C and E written statements;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. A written report on the occupancy of a motor vehicle from the driver;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

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

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

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [Provided, That the lowest limit shall be the minimum limit for the crimes of violation of the Road Traffic Act];

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Although there was no agreement with the victims of the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, the defendant was the first offender, the defendant reflects the crime of this case, the fact that the defendant subscribed to the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, and the age of the defendant is determined by the order.