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

The defendant is engaged in driving a vehicle B in the U. S. Cubus.

On September 10, 2017, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on September 20, 2017, and driven the four-lanes in front of the police box of high-ro 83 high-Eup, high-speed, high-speed, high-speed, high-speed, along the two-lanes in front of the police box of 83 high-speed, toward the side of Taedge Agricultural Cooperative.

At that place, there is an intersection where signal lights are installed.

In such cases, the driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to confirm whether there is a motor vehicle that drives the motor vehicle along the intersection by reducing speed and checking well the direction of the road, and to prevent the accident in advance by safely driving the motor vehicle in accordance with the traffic signals.

Nevertheless, although the defendant neglected this and the signal is changed to a stop signal, the victim C (Woo, 39 years old) who continued to turn to the left at the same speed in violation of the signal and continued to turn to the left in accordance with the new signal, and the part after the right side of the DKan Roon driven by the defendant, conflicts with the front part of the vehicle of the defendant.

As a result, the Defendant suffered by negligence in the course of performing his duties the injury of the victim C, East E (V, 9 years old), F (V, 12 years old), G (V, 14 years old), H (V, 14 years old), etc., such as dump dump, which requires approximately two weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Fact-finding survey report and report on the occurrence of any traffic accident;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to photographs of accident scene and black stuff images;

1. Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, 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. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is deemed to be against the Defendant at the time of committing the instant crime, but the primary offender is deemed to have been aware of the fact, and on the other hand, five victims are injured by negligence in violation of the Defendant’s signal.