On October 3, 2016, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at around 11:30 on October 3, 2016, and came to the speed of about 15 km at a speed to proceed from the sloping-gun's intersection to the terminal of the shuttle bus at a distance of 15 km.

Since there is no traffic control, the driver of any motor vehicle who intends to enter the intersection is obliged to yield the course to another motor vehicle when there is another motor vehicle already entering the intersection.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and re-entered the part of the victim C(74 ) driving the victim C(74 ) driving to the right side from the left side of the defendant's vehicle at the time of the defendant's failure to enter the intersection into the intersection.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as salt, tension, etc., in need of approximately two weeks of treatment due to occupational negligence.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and 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, it is recognized that the victim expressed his wish not to punish the defendant on November 4, 2016, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.