However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of a small-type taxi for business use C.

On March 27, 2014, the Defendant driven the above taxi on March 27, 2014, and proceeded with the shooting distance of the 806 insolvency park from the shooting distance protection of the Cheongdoro Hospital to the Cheongdoro, Gangnam-gu Seoul.

A person engaged in driving service has neglected to perform his/her duty of care to prevent an accident by driving safely according to the traffic signal, and due to negligence that violates and proceeds from the signal even though the electric traffic signal is red, he/she was driven by the victim D(32 years of age) who was left to the left according to the normal signal sent at the seat of Seoul Customs office.

As a result, the defendant suffered from the victim's abandonment of the foundation required for approximately seven weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement of F and D;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Selection of alternative imprisonment without prison labor;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [Scope of Recommendation] The grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence [Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [Scope of Recommendation] In the area of mitigation (one to six months) of general traffic accidents [Special Mitigation] [Pronouncement Decision] and one year of suspended sentence (one year of suspended sentence] in April of imprisonment without prison labor (the occurrence of the instant accident due to the violation of signal, the fact that the instant accident occurred due to the violation of signal, the fact that there was a past 15 years prior to the closure of pleadings, and the fact that the