If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in the duty of driving B rocketing taxi.

On December 22, 2016, the Defendant driven the above taxi on December 22, 2016, and proceeded in front of the crosswalk C in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, with a view to a view to a view to a view from the offside of the network.

Since the location is equipped with a red on-and-off signal, there is a duty of care to prevent accidents, such as temporary suspension in front of the crosswalk in order to the person engaged in the driving of the motor vehicle, and confirmation of whether there is a pedestrian in the crosswalk, etc.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not temporarily stop in front of the above crosswalk and did not discover the victim D (24 ) who was dried on the right side from the left side of the running direction of the above crosswalk, and did not see the victim D (24 ) and did so in excess of the floor by shocking the damaged part on the left side of the above taxi.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as the right slots, which requires approximately 12 weeks of treatment, due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The investigation report on the actual condition of traffic accidents, the statement on the occurrence of traffic accidents, and the application of each medical certificate to statutes;

1. Relevant Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) 1 and 6, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense, and Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents According to the Selection of Sentence, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the instant accident was caused by the Defendant’s gross negligence for the reason of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the fact that the victim suffered serious injury due to the instant accident is considered disadvantageously. The Defendant recognized the facts of the instant crime and reflects the mistake, and the victim did not want to be punished against the Defendant by agreement with the victim, and the Defendant was past.