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

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a three-string-sized passenger vehicle.

On April 18, 2017, the Defendant driven the above vans around 20:35, and made the front intersection D at Jeju to turn to the left from the entrance of the North Korean Industrial Complex at the front of the English advertising metal.

At the front of the road, there is a pedestrian crossing installed with signal apparatus, so if a pedestrian passes the pedestrian crossing, he/she shall temporarily stop in front of the pedestrian crossing and neglect his/her duty of care to protect the pedestrian, while neglecting his/her duty of care to protect the pedestrian, and thereby, by negligence in the course of his/her duties, he/she finds out the victim F (W, 34 years old) late from the left side of the defendant's moving direction to the right side of the pedestrian signals in accordance with the pedestrian signals, and went beyond the victim's bridge side with the front part of the defendant's vehicle.

As a result, Defendant 1 suffered injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, such as the 10-day treatment of the victim, which requires approximately 10 weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement of victim (F);

1. A medical certificate;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the site and accident vehicle photographs;

1. Article 3 (1), Article 3 (2) 1 and 6 of the Act, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the special treatment of the option of traffic accidents, and the choice of imprisonment without prison labor;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for an order to attend a lecture include the fact that the defendant acknowledged the crime, the fact that the defendant subscribed to a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance and appears to have been recovered from damage through the insurance relationship (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 40 million won). In addition to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents in around 192, the fact that there

However, the traffic accident of this case occurred when the defendant violated the duty to protect pedestrians in the crosswalk.