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

The Defendant loaded iron plates removed from the building partitions in the process of removing the buildings on the side of the Namyang-si, Namyang-si, and C installed the so-called “air sign”, which is set up and set up with wind in order to advertise a restaurant at the above place.

Since the above place is a place where a two-way person, etc. passes, and the two-way person, etc. are likely to go up or face by the signboard or iron plate, the defendant has a duty of care to prevent the occurrence of an accident by putting the said iron plate or taking safety measures, and C also has a duty of care to prevent the occurrence of an accident, such as putting the said signboard up or taking safety measures.

Nevertheless, the Defendant and C left the iron plates and signboards without being left as they are, and around May 30, 2017, at around 08:30 on May 30, 2017, the victim D (9 years old) who was leaving the said places, caused the said fish signboards to go beyond the upper limit, and caused them to go against the iron plates that were next to the said places.

After all, the Defendant, in collaboration with C, suffered from the right side of the victim, which requires approximately two weeks of care due to the above negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A statement prepared by the complainant, the police preparation statement made to E, the scene, and the type of damage inflicted upon the complainants, the diagnostic report, and the protocol prepared by the police for the suspect C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries, such as criminal history;

1. Article 266 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime, Articles 266(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, and the selection of fines for the crime;

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

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act are as follows: (a) the Defendant recognized the criminal facts of this case and reflects his mistake; and (b) the economic situation as a recipient of basic living assistance appears to have not been followed by the judicial branch after the judicial branch, is recognized as favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, however, the injury suffered by the victim is not relatively weak, and until now, it is agreed with the victim.