Although there is a straight line of one-lane and a speed prevention threshold, the Defendant was found to be the front part of the Defendant’s driver’s vehicle by occupational negligence while driving without putting the frontway properly and without maintaining the safety distance with the vehicle running ahead of it. The lower part of the victim E (n, 45 years old)’s small truck driving in the Fpoter is the front part of the Defendant’s driving vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant: (a) inflicted injury on the victim E, such as cerebral alins, etc. whose details are unknown for three weeks of treatment; (b) inflicted injury on the victim G (Nam and 50 years of age) who was accompanied by the damaged vehicle, such as diversified salinary salins, salt salins, etc. for three weeks of treatment; (c) inflicted injury on the victim H (ma and 9 years of age), which requires multiple salinsal salins, etc. in need of three weeks of treatment; and (d) inflicted injury on the victim I (n and 8 years of age) on the dalinsal salinsal salins, etc. requiring three weeks of treatment; and (d) escaped without immediately stopping the damaged vehicle in order to cause damage to the cost of repair equivalent to KRW 2

2. The Defendant asserted that, immediately after the traffic accident in this case, he asked the J, his wife, who was in charge of the accident, to post a telephone and to deal with the accident at the site of the accident. Upon his request, the J, who was in charge of the accident site, provided not only the victims with relief measures, but also the police officer dispatched to the accident site with his personal information. The Defendant was more 50m from the site of the accident, even if the victims sent back to the scene of the accident to the 119 emergency vehicle.