A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

On December 27, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. at the Jeonju District Court on December 27, 201, and completed the execution of the sentence on June 4, 2012.

1. Around 00:20 on December 13, 2012, the Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act and the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, driving CM5 automobiles under the influence of alcohol by 0.127% while under the influence of alcohol without purchasing mandatory insurance from the road before the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-dong, Seo-gu, Seo-dong, Seo-dong, Seo-gu, Seocheon-dong, to the front road of the Yan-dong, Seo-gu, Seocheon-dong, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-dong, Seocheon-gu.

2. On December 13, 2012, the Defendant violated the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and the Road Traffic Act (unclaimed Measures after Accidents) driving the said vehicle at around 00:20 on December 13, 2012, and driving the road in front of the fixed distance in the Sung-dong, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, in a printing, creative distance range from the front of the printing, thereby driving a road at about 40 km one speed each hour depending on the one-lane distance.

At the time, it is a new wall and a long distance intersection where signal lights are installed. In such a case, the defendant engaged in driving of the motor vehicle had a duty of care to safely drive the steering gear and brake system by accurately manipulating the steering gear and brake system.

Nevertheless, by neglecting this, the Defendant was negligent in driving a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol by neglecting it at the front time, and the part of the fronter of the Defendant’s vehicle is as is the part of the victim’s vehicle’s vehicle’s vehicle’s vehicle’s epicion part, and then, due to the shock of the vehicle in front, the part of the FF driver’s G rocketing or other vehicles which stopped in front of the vehicle’s vehicle was left behind as they were.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered Hask-in and Hask-in salt in need of treatment for about three days by occupational negligence by the victim H (W, 22 years old) who was accompanied by the victim Hask-in car. The Defendant’s repair cost for the victim’s Hask-in car owned by the victim D, 84.