A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten 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

[criminal power] On March 20, 2007, the Defendant received a summary order of 1.5 million won or more as a crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) from the Daejeon District Court Branch of the Daejeon District Court on March 20, 2007. On December 5, 2008, the Defendant received a summary order of 3 million won or more as a fine by the same court.

【Criminal Facts】

1. The Defendant in violation of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act is the owner of the freight vehicle B.

No person shall operate any motor vehicle which is not covered by mandatory insurance on a road.

Nevertheless, around June 8, 2016, the Defendant operated the foregoing cargo vehicle without mandatory insurance from the front of the rent apartment house of the Geum River, which was located in the 96-ro, Seosan-si, Seocheon-gun, Seocheon-do to the 271, Jeoncheon-gun, Jeoncheon-do.

2. The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a cargo vehicle under B ribee in violation of the Road Traffic Act and the Road Traffic Act;

At around 13:30 on June 8, 2016, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol 0.211% at the bar of the Yanju-gun, Gyeongcheon-gun, Gyeongcheon-do, Gyeongcheon-do, 271, and became under the influence of alcohol 0.21%.

In such cases, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents through thorough implementation of the duty of care.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, neglected to do so, and was parked in the lower bank of the Defendant, due to the negligence of the Defendant, led the victim C, who was parked in the lower bank of the Defendant, to the part behind the car of the Defendant’s driver and the part behind the car of the Defendant’s driver.

Ultimately, the Defendant damaged the franchise to the extent that the repair cost is 680,546 won due to the above occupational negligence by exchanging the franchiseer car.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of C, E, and F;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Notification of the circumstantial statements of a drinking driver and the control results of drinking driving; and