Since the entrance of the above store was only the one of the visitors to the commercial building, there was a duty of care to pay attention to avoid any collision with other people by checking whether there is no pedestrian who walk around the place as above, and whether there is no pedestrian who walk around the surrounding area.

Nevertheless, the Defendants neglected to do so, and Defendant B pushed the Defendant A, who was able to drive her own, without examining the surrounding areas, and Defendant A was faced with the victim H (the age of 92) who was fright behind the Defendant due to its shock, and the victim was fright up to the way.

As a result, the Defendants suffered from the joint negligence the injury of the victim, such as the cutting of the body in the vicinity of the remains in the mission, which is the left-hand body requiring treatment for about seven weeks.

2. Determination

A. In this case, the police statement of the victim can be said to be the evidence that corresponds to the facts charged.

However, in light of the following circumstances, it is not sufficient to recognize that the above statement of statement alone is sufficient to recognize that the defendants had the victims faced with the victim by negligence, and there is no other evidence to recognize it.

① 피해자는 사고 당일인 2013. 9. 26. 최초 출동한 경찰관이 “할머니를 택시로 데리고 온 젊은 남자가 밀었느냐 ”고 묻자 “저 남자는 아니다.”라고 말하였다가, 2013. 11. 22. 경찰관이 CCTV 캡쳐사진을 보여주자 “제가 눈이 어두워서 잘 보이지가 않지만 그 남자와 여자가 맞는 것 같습니다.”라고 진술하였으며, "뚱뚱한 여자가 남자를 밀쳐서 그 남자가 저를 향해 넘어졌고 그것 때문에 제가 넘어졌어요...