except that 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 the B-learning passenger car.

On July 3, 2016, the Defendant driven the said car on July 21, 2016, and proceeded to the left at a speed that is not known to the Gu Hospital History distance from the HannamIC, Gangnam-gu, Seoul.

Since there is a road that frequently passes through the edge of the road, there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving service is in the direction of proceeding by reducing speed and by properly examining the right and the right of the road.

Nevertheless, when the defendant neglected this and proceeded to the left without looking at the right edge of the above vehicle, the defendant taken the victim E (26 years of age), the victim F (24 years of age) who walked toward the right edge of the above vehicle to the new history distance from the edge of the wall of hospital Eul, and the victim F (24 years of age) in front of the left edge of the above vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to E, such as the mouth and closure of external reproduction, which requires approximately 6 weeks of medical treatment, due to the above occupational negligence, and injury to F, such as catum salt, tension, etc. requiring approximately 3 weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Statement of the occurrence of each traffic accident by E and F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each written diagnosis;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents Optional to Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Selection of alternative imprisonment without prison labor;

1. The reason for the sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act under the suspended sentence is that there was an injury to the victims due to the shock of the victims who walked, and that there was no such agreement on the injury of the victims.

However, the fact that the defendant is against himself, is imprisonment or more.