A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two 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

On October 9, 2006, the defendant was issued a summary order of 2.5 million won by the Busan District Court due to the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act.

1. On March 28, 2020, the Defendant violated the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Bodily Injury resulting from Dangerous Driving) and the Road Traffic Act (hereinafter “Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc.”) driving a B car under the influence of alcohol level of 0.137%, and driving the B car under the influence of alcohol level of 0.137% on March 28, 202 along the two-lanes in the direction of the Franc City.

At the same time, there are two-lane roads in which the central separation cost is installed, and the driver of the motor vehicle has the duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by properly manipulating steering devices and brakes.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, neglected the duty of the front-time navigation in a state where normal driving is difficult, and failed to properly operate the steering gear, led to the centralized separation zone of the said road on the part of the driver’s seat of the said car that the Defendant drives.

As a result, the Defendant driving a motor vehicle in a state where normal driving is difficult due to influence of drinking, resulting in the injury of the victim C (ma, 54 years old) who is a passenger of the said motor vehicle for about three weeks, such as the number of light cars requiring treatment for about three weeks, and the damage of the detailed secrets, and at the same time, damaged the central separation zone of the said road in a total of 649,000 won.

2. The Defendant violated the Road Traffic Act (driving) driving the said car under the influence of alcohol with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.137% from a wooden passenger terminal located on 14 14 km away along the coast at a temporary border, such as set forth in paragraph (1), to the site of accident as set forth in paragraph (1).

Accordingly, the defendant violated Article 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act not less than twice.

Summary of Evidence

1. The police of the defendant's legal statement C.