At the time, the passage of pedestrians is frequent on the road in the apartment complex, and in such a case, the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to check whether there is no pedestrian by checking the front door and the left and right of the motor vehicle, and to accurately manipulate the steering direction and the brakes so as to prevent the accident from occurring.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and found the victim D (son, 60 years old) who dried the road in the apartment on the right side of the Defendant’s running of the said car on the left side of the Defendant’s running of the said car, and received the victim as the front driver of the vehicle of the Defendant, and suffered an injury, such as an injury to the victim due to an open 20 weeks of treatment, which caused the decline in recognition, language, walking ability, etc., of the victim.

2. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes 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 pursuant to the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

Therefore, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act, since the victim withdraws his wish to punish the defendant after the indictment of this case was instituted.