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

The defendant is engaged in driving a coo vehicle in C.

On November 25, 2015, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at a speed of about 30 to 40km/h of speed from the two-lanes between the 3-lanes from the east of the Gu office to the east of the east of the east of the city.

In such cases, since the location is an intersection where signal lights are installed, there is a duty of care to report the traffic situation on the front side well and to safely drive in accordance with the new code.

Nevertheless, by neglecting this, the victim D (W. 30 years old) who was proceeding from the 4-dong 4 Am2 to the maid maid by the negligence of entering the red maid intersection, which was driven by the victim D (W. 30 years old).

E In order to find out a vehicle with a rash vehicle and avoid an accident, the rash system was applied.

Ultimately, due to the above occupational negligence, the above victim suffered bodily injury, such as the pipe and tension of the above victim in need of approximately two weeks of treatment, and the tension and tension of the part of the above 2 weeks of treatment, and the victim FF (37 years of age) in need of approximately two weeks of treatment, and other injuries, such as the pipe and tension of the part of the above neck and the tension of the body part, and the tension with the victim, and escape without taking necessary measures, such as aiding the damaged person.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to D;

1. The actual investigation report on traffic accidents;

1. A criminal investigation report (STV image verification and hearing statements from victims);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each written diagnosis;

1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime as prescribed in the corresponding Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. Determination of the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act regarding the provisional payment order is insignificant and thus the Defendant is entirely aware of the instant accident.