A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

1. On September 9, 2014, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Death or Injury caused by Dangerous Driving) and the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “Road Traffic Act”) and the Defendant had a Clater drive a motor vehicle in a state where it is difficult to drive the motor vehicle under normal conditions, such as a 0.184% of the blood alcohol concentration in the direction of horizontal distance, due to the influence of alcohol from the direction of horizontal direction.

A person engaged in driving a motor vehicle has a duty of care to live well before and after the vehicle and to safely proceed by operating the brake system well.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to operate the operation of the operation system, and neglected by negligence, led the victim D (the 39 years old), who was driven by the victim D (the 39 years old), following the EM3 car driven by the Defendant, to the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle. As a result, the above SM3 car was pushed forward in the future, and the victim F (the South and the age of 31) driven by the Defendant, who was parked in the above manner, continued to have a criminal part behind the GM3 car driven by the victim F (the South and the age of 31). In the future, the above low-speed car was driven by the victim H (the South and the age of 44) after the driver’s vehicle driven by the victim H (the 49 years old), and the above Kaf car was pushed back by the victim J (the 49 years old).

Ultimately, the Defendant is obliged to drive the said car in a state where normal driving is difficult due to influence of drinking, resulting in injury to the victim D, such as light fat, which requires approximately three weeks of medical treatment, etc., and thus, entered the victim L in the annexed crime sight list attached to the indictment (However, the victim L's age No. 2 is 80 years of age, hereinafter referred to as "80 years of age"), but in light of each evidence of the judgment, it is obvious that it is a clerical error, so it is to the extent that it does not interfere with the Defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense.