When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving business of the DM7 vehicle volume.

On October 28, 2013, the Defendant, around 18:34 on October 28, 2013, had been proceeding two lanes at a speed of about 50K km in the speed of about 43 KK as the area of the dead front line in Gwangju National Road No. 43 in the vicinity of the Suwon-si Park Cemetery.

Despite the duty of care to prevent an accident by driving the vehicle with the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and the right and duty of care to prevent the accident while driving the vehicle, the defendant, while neglecting to do so, failed to take appropriate measures such as immediately stopping the vehicle at the scene of the accident and providing rescue to the victim, even though he/she caused physical damage of approximately KRW 748,350 for about two weeks due to the shock and the right and duty of care due to the influence of the victim E driving the vehicle prior to the occurrence of the accident, and caused the victim's shock and the right and duty of care to prevent the occurrence of the accident.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made in court to the effect that the defendant has caused a traffic accident at the time and place;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. A certificate of damage diagnosis;

1. Written estimate of damage;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes related to the crime, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the crime;

1. Punishment provided for in Articles 40 and 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Punishment provided for in the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which is heavier than punishment);

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act with the purport that the criminal intent of escape is not recognized, since there was no need for relief measures at the time of the instant traffic accident.