In such a case, a driver of a vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents, such as ensuring safety distance to avoid collisions, in the event the vehicle that was driven by the driver of the vehicle stops suddenly, by accurately operating the steering direction and brakes of the vehicle, and other devices such as the steering direction and brakes of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this, while driving a vehicle in close vicinity to the vehicle in front of the vehicle due to the negligence of driving the vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the victim D(36 ) driving EST5 car, received the back panion of the Defendant’s vehicle in front of the vehicle in front of the Defendant, and inflicted injury on D, such as salt, tensions, etc. in need of approximately two weeks of medical treatment, suffered injury on the victim F, who is the passenger of the damaged vehicle, such as kne, kne, and knee, kne, and tensions of the damaged vehicle in need of medical treatment for about two weeks, and damaged the damaged vehicle so that the repair cost, such as the exchange of flaf, 164,298 won, is equal to KRW 1,168.

2. We examine the judgment. The case is a crime falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. According to the records, the victims can recognize the fact that they have withdrawn their wish to punish the defendant on May 16, 2016. Thus, the prosecution against the defendant is dismissed under Article 327(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.