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 engaging in driving a sealed 3 cargo vehicle.

On April 15, 2020, around 08:00, the Defendant moved from the runway to the front of the D cafeteria located in Seo-gu Incheon, Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, along the E-mick line off from the runway to the E-mick line off from the four-lane road to the one-lane.

In case of changing a lane to a person engaged in driving service, the driver has a duty of care to give prior notice of course by operating direction direction, etc. and to change the lane in the situation of traffic in the front and rear left.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to change the lane from the four lanes to the one lane in the direction of the large line, and thereby, received the front part of the Victim F, who is driving in the first lane in the part of the driver's seat of the Defendant vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from an injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, such as paralysis and urine disorder, etc. which were not permanently set up due to the release chill, etc. requiring approximately 32 weeks of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the police concerning F of the defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on the occurrence of a traffic accident, an accident site photograph, and an actual condition survey report;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to medical opinions and requests for cooperation in investigation (whether to cause serious injury);

1. Relevant Acts concerning criminal facts, Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Selection and Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and selection of imprisonment without prison labor

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. In light of the circumstances leading up to sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act, the Defendant’s breach of the duty of care is not minor, and the victim suffered serious injury.

However, considering the fact that the defendant reflects the crime, the fact that the defendant was subscribed to a motor vehicle comprehensive insurance, and that the defendant has no record of punishment heavier than the fine, it also takes into account all other circumstances such as the defendant's age, health status, home environment, etc.