If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

On July 3, 2015, the Defendant driven Ctoscar car as a duty on July 3, 2015, while driving the Ptoscar car at the speed of about 40 to 50 km from the front city hospital at the speed of about 40 to 50 km from the front city at the front city.

At all times, drivers of motor vehicles have a duty of care to safely drive motor vehicles by accurately manipulating equipment such as brakes and steering gear.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and got a utility pole installed on the right side of the Defendant’s driver’s driver’s car to the right side of the driver’s car, and then received India’s speed beyond the median line and received it as the front wheels of the driver’s driver’s car in front of the left side of the driver’s car and suffered injury, such as the opening of the right side and the left side eye, which requires approximately two weeks of treatment.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not take necessary measures, such as removal of traffic obstacles and risks, by neglecting the said car even after causing the above traffic accident.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. A traffic accident report, a traffic accident scene, photographs of the vehicle, and a traffic accident report;

1. 112 Reporting case handling table;

1. Reports on internal accidents (related to towing measures for vehicles, telephone conversations with A, driver's specific relation);

1. A investigation report (related to the danger at the scene of an accident);

1. Photographs related to telephone conversations (38 pages of investigation records), CCTV images (52 pages of investigation records), application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs on site of accident;

1. Article 148 of the relevant Act and Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, the selection of fines concerning facts constituting an offense, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order is an accident in which the Defendant was placed at the seat of telegraph or Indian seat.