When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

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

Around 02:20 on June 15, 2020, the Defendant driven the above vehicle and proceeded at a speed of about 30 km at a speed of 30 km from the front side of C in the southyang-si to the front side of C at a speed of 50 km.

In such cases, a driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to live well on the right and the right and the right and the right of the motor vehicle, to accurately operate the operation and steering gear, and to safely drive the motor vehicle in good faith.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and instead tried to remove the cell phones in the above car driving seat knicket, and received the street lamps installed in the right side of the pedestrian waiting zone in the direction of the proceeding from the lane to the front part of the vehicle of the Defendant.

Ultimately, even though the Defendant caused the danger and impairment of traffic by destroying property to repair the street lamps due to such occupational negligence, the Defendant immediately stopped the vehicle and did not take necessary measures, and left the site without leaving the said vehicle as it is.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each video recorded in a black stuffed vehicle image (No. 43 pages of evidence);

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. An accident site photograph;

1. 112 Report disposal slips;

1. A report on internal investigation (statements by reporters);

1. Application of the Act and subordinate statutes on Report of Investigation (Korean Vehicle Track Images);

1. Relevant Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act and the choice of fines for criminal facts;

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act for sentencing under Article 334(1) are as follows: (a) the Defendant recognized all the facts charged in the instant case and reflects his depth about his mistake; (b) the traffic risk and disability resulting from the instant crime appears not to have been serious; (c) the Defendant’s economic situation seems to be difficult; and (d) the Defendant has a previous conviction.