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 leisure car B.

On August 19, 2015, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on August 18, 2015, and led to opening the front of the D pharmacy in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the opening distance from the intersection.

At the time, since the FIstren car driven by the victim E (58 years old) was a stop for the signal atmosphere, there was a duty of care to check the safety of the course by reducing speed and checking the right and the right and the right of the vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and got the victim's vehicle back to the end of the Defendant's vehicle due to negligence, thereby causing injury to the victim, such as climatic salt, etc., which requires treatment for about two weeks, and at the same time, did not immediately stop the vehicle after the above damage so that the amount of 834,040 won would be damaged and the victim would escape without taking necessary measures, such as providing rescue to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of the written estimate for automobile inspection and maintenance;

1. Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, Articles 148 and 54 (1) of the Road Traffic Act concerning the crime;

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

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., the degree of injury and the insurance coverage);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution;

1. An order to attend a lecture shall be rendered for the reasons under Article 62-2 (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc.;