The defendant is a person engaged in driving a BM5 vehicle.

On November 21, 201, 201, the Defendant proceeded along the two-lanes between the five-lanes in order to keep a private distance near the usual village oil station in the Dong-dong of the Dong-dong of the Dong-gu in Ansan-si.

Since there has been a signal, the Defendant was obliged to safely proceed with the signal.

Nevertheless, the Defendant was driven by the victim C(the age of 48) who, by negligence in contravention of the signal, left to the left at the location of the sampling village from the dystal boundary of the Maman-Sast and the front part of the SM5 car operated by the victim C(the age of 48).

As a result, the Defendant: (a) caused the injury to the victim C in light of the foregoing occupational negligence during approximately two weeks to the victim C, such as catherum, tensions and tensions; (b) the injury to the victim E (the victim 20 years old); (c) the injury to the catum, catum, tensions and tensions, etc. requiring approximately two weeks of treatment; (d) the injury to the passenger victim FF (the passenger 48 years old); and (e) the injury to the catum catum, cat, and datums, etc. requiring approximately six weeks of treatment; and (e) at the same time, the Defendant damaged the said rocketing car to cover KRW 4,625,588 of the repairing cost.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Each written diagnosis and written estimate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the report on traffic accidents;

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents concerning Criminal Facts, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. The sentence is to be imposed in light of the fact that the defendant, on the ground of the selective sentencing of the sentence, did not take any measures to recover damage against the victims even though he did not have any traffic accident in the state that he was not insured.