When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

In order to order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a bicycle.

On June 28, 2020, the Defendant driven a bicycle at around 17:50 on June 28, 2020, and led to crossing the road adjacent to the crosswalk, which is located near the shot-distance, Seo-gu, Daejeon.

Since it is a road, there was a duty of care to not cross the road to a person engaged in driving of a bicycle, and not to interfere with the flow of a vehicle normally driving.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to cross the road adjacent to the crosswalk, and received the front part of the DW125 two-wheeled bicycle driving by the victim C ( South and 39 years old) who circumvents the direction of the lane from the B to the lower-speed of the lane, as the front part of the Defendant’s bicycle driving.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as salt, tension, etc. in the part where the details of the loss requiring treatment for about two weeks due to such occupational negligence, and at the same time damaged the damaged vehicle to have approximately KRW 1,762,700 as repair cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement of C (Simplified traffic);

1. A traffic accident report (1) (2) (actual survey report);

1. A written diagnosis and written estimate;

1. CCTV image CDs at an accident point;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act (the act of causing property by negligence)

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravated Punishment of Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Between Violation of the Road Traffic Act, and Punishment of Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of

1. Selection of punishment;

Selection of Fines

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

Reasons for sentencing

The crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, such as that the defendant driving a bicycle, crossing the road adjacent to the crosswalk, resulting in a traffic accident, causing injury to the victim who is a driver of Oralba, and at the same time, damaged it and the negligence and criminal liability of the defendant are not less strict, and that the victim wants to punish the defendant.

On the other hand, the Defendant’s negligence can be seen as the cause of the instant traffic accident, such as the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the Defendant’s mistake in depth, that the Defendant dealt with the insurance to compensate for damage, that the victim neglected his duty of care and care at the time of the accident, etc., and that the Defendant operated a heavy-phone store, and that the Defendant’s economic situation is not good for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant was operating a heavy-phone store; (b) the sales was reduced due to the prevalence 19 and the social distance storage, etc.; and (c) the Defendant’s economic situation is not good.

Other factors of sentencing, such as the age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive, means and result of the crime, and circumstances before and after the crime, shall be determined as ordered in comprehensive consideration.