A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On December 19, 2015, the Defendant violated the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (hereinafter referred to as “Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents”) led to a person who is engaged in driving a motor vehicle by obtaining the franchise, and the route near D in C around 03:30 on December 19, 2015, along a one-lane of the first one-lane between the bank and the bank for senior citizens, as the bank head

The Defendant, prior to the same direction, was followed by a F taxi driven by the victim E, and thus, in such a case, the Defendant had a duty of care to take care of the person engaged in driving of the automobile, and to secure and proceed with the safety distance to avoid when the said taxi stops.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not find out that the said taxi stops while under the influence of alcohol to the extent that the Defendant neglected this and parked, and immediately stops, and received the back part of the damaged vehicle as the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim E, such as brain salvin in need of approximately two weeks’ medical treatment due to such occupational negligence, and injury to the victim G (47 years old) who is the above taxi driver, such as salt pans, tensions, and so on for about two weeks’ medical treatment.

2. Violation of the Road Traffic Act (Refusal of measurement of drinking), the Defendant driven a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol by a police officer belonging to the Southern Police Station while driving a motor vehicle under the influence of drinking, such as smelling and smelling red on the face, on the roads near D as described in paragraph (1), at the time of the day specified in paragraph (1), as described in paragraph (1).

There are reasonable grounds to determine a person who has been requested to respond to the measurement of drinking by inserting approximately five drinking meters into a drinking measuring instrument on five occasions.

그럼에도 피고인은 음주 측정기에 입김을 불어 넣는 시늉만 하는 방법으로 이를 회피하여 정당한 사유 없이 경찰공무원의 음주 측정 요구에 응하지 아니하였다....