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

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a C3.5 tons truck.

On July 21, 2014, around 08:55 minutes, the Defendant driven the above truck and proceeded at about 20 km in speed in the direction of a mountain in the direction of a mountain in the direction of a mountain in the direction of a mountain.

In this case, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to safely enter the intersection to check whether a vehicle that enters the intersection has entered the intersection before entering the intersection and to check whether there is a vehicle that enters the intersection, and to prevent the accident by safely entering the intersection.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to stop and proceed as is without stopping, and entered the above intersection and was driven by the victim D (the aged 61) who proceeded in the direction of the mountain-speed village from the direction of the forest-speed village in front of the Defendant’s vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury, such as light-frames and non-alleys open to the left-hand side in need of approximately 12 weeks of treatment due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. D's legal statement;

1. The actual condition of traffic accidents;

1. An accident site and a photograph of an accident vehicle;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) of the relevant Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the proviso to Article 2 and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Judgment on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act regarding orders to provide community service and attend lectures

1. The Defendant had no record of violating the signal given that the Defendant was at a stop line after departure from the stop line and the accident occurred.

2. According to the evidence duly admitted by this court, the victim's driver's error entered the intersection is immediately after the victim's driver's error entered the intersection.