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 the duty of driving a B E-car.

On 13:30 on 13:20 on 2015, the Defendant was driving the said car and proceeded with four lanes in front of the “D” Macherb in North-gu C at the port of port along the distance from the north-gu at the port of port to the distance from the surface of the road at the speed of about 10km at the speed of 10km.

The place is a road on which a central line is installed, and since the U.S. permitted point for U.S. internships is established, there was a duty of care for those engaged in driving duties to make a U.S. internships at the permissible point for U.S. internships.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and received the front part of the FOba, which was driven by the injured party E (the aged 29) who had been driven by the fright-handba in the direction of the vehicle in front of the Defendant’s vehicle, when the Defendant had been flicked with the central line at a place other than the U.S. permissible zone.

As a result, the Defendant suffered approximately 14 weeks of medical treatment from the victim due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement of the occurrence of E traffic accidents;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a traffic accident report, on-site photograph and diagnostic certificate;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Special Cases concerning the Selection of Punishment for Criminal Facts, Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

1. Suspension of execution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the first offender, the insurance is subscribed to a comprehensive insurance, and the victim does not want to be punished);