On July 4, 2014, at around 13:30, the Defendant driven the above bicycle and proceeded with the bicycle lane of 65 degrees 65 degrees from the right side of the river at the speed of speed from the right side to the right side of the river at the speed of speed, the Defendant had a duty of care to look at the front side and the right side well and to prevent accidents by accurately manipulating the steering direction and the brake system and to prevent accidents.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and failed to secure the safety distance and failed to pass it, and the victim C (the 66-year old) who was proceeding in the front of the defendant's bicycle was faced with the left side of the bicycle operated by the victim C (the 66-year old) on the right side of the bicycle.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim to suffer from the above occupational negligence in light of the fact that the victim was in need of approximately 12 weeks of medical treatment.

2. We examine the judgment. This is a crime falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 268(2) of the Criminal Act. According to the records, it can be acknowledged that the victim C expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the defendant on February 3, 2015, after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparag.