However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a motor device or bicycle.

On December 30, 2016, at around 20:40, the Defendant operated the motor device bicycle in front of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, thereby driving the bicycle along the front of the motor device and driving the bicycle along the front side of the modern apartment room.

Since there is a cross-section where signal lights are installed in the front bank, in such a case, the driver of the motor vehicle has a duty of care to safely drive the motor vehicle in accordance with the new code.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to stop the vehicle driving signal while entering the intersection as it was, and due to the negligence of entering the intersection, received the front part of the victim D(17) driving E-Engine driving bicycle from the victim D(17 years old) who was going to go in accordance with the new code from the surface of the Gu shooting distance room to the front part of the bicycle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered, by such occupational negligence, the injury to the victim D, such as a dubation with the inside for about 8 weeks of treatment, and the injury to the victim F (M, 17 years of age) who was accompanied by the victim D driver's motor device bicycle, such as a dubation at the bottom of the bar that requires approximately 4 weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written statements prepared D and F;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report internal investigation (verification of the cause of accident by the CCTV image analysis);

1. Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the proviso to Article 3 (2) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes (the punishment imposed on a victim D with a heavier criminal penalty)

1. Selection of a credit cooperative without prison labor for punishment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the Defendant is engaged in the delivery-related business using Orala, and thus, is higher than that of ordinary drivers.