The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving CA car.

On November 7, 2018, the Defendant driven the above car at a speed of about 10km per hour, depending on the right-way route from the direction of the U. S. S. in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, the front road of Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, was driven at a speed of about 10km.

At the time, it was difficult to secure the view due to the late night time, and there was a crosswalk with pedestrian signal, etc. installed at the front door, so in such a case, there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle was a person to reduce the speed and to see well the right and the right and the right of the motor vehicle and to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected it and led the victim to go beyond the ground by moving the right side of the victim E (in this case, 53 years old) who opened the crosswalk to the right side of the victim E (in this case, 53 years old) who opened the crosswalk to the right side of the road in accordance with the pedestrian signals from the left side of the direction of the road by the negligence of moving it to the right side of the above vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim from an injury to the surgery of a closed garrising surgery, which requires approximately seven weeks of treatment, due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the occurrence of E traffic accident;

1. The actual survey report on traffic accidents;

1. Blue vehicle records and video CDs;

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

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents Optional to Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and selection of fines

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with regard to a provisional payment order is that the defendant erred by violating the duty to protect pedestrians, causing a traffic accident, and the degree of injury to the victim is not weak.

Provided, That the defendant has no record of criminal punishment other than three times of a fine.

The defendant.