The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving as a Tractor B.

At around 15:10 on October 1, 2014, the Defendant: (a) received a request from the victim C(73 years of age) to harvest mathy in the E-building field adjacent to the E-building site located adjacent to the E-building site located adjacent to the Sinsi-si; (b) attached a mathor to the lower part of the Tracter; and (c) driven the Tracor, driving the Tracor, leading the Tracor, leading the Trac

In this case, there was a duty of care to safely drive the Tracker's driver, such as taking the Track and left and right well, and accurately operating the steering gear and brakes.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected to do so and proceeded with it, and received a garment with the victim's bridge connected to the Trackter, which was in the above Trackter.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim to suffer bodily injury, such as cutting down on the left-hand side and cutting down the right-hand trees, which require approximately eight weeks of treatment due to the occupational negligence above, thereby causing the victim to suffer from an injury, which is caused by the bodily injury.

2. The judgment of the court below is the case falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, which cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent pursuant to the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

However, on August 11, 2015, after the prosecution of this case was instituted, the victim did not want the punishment of the defendant after the full agreement with the defendant on August 11, 2015. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.