Since there is a sign of restriction on career change in the white-ray, the driver has a duty of care to safely drive the motor vehicle without changing the course and prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and instead received the Defendant’s front part of the front part of the vehicle in front of the Defendant’s vehicle, while driving the Victim F (F, South and 30 years old), who was in the same direction as the horses when the Defendant was negligent in changing the course from the front line.

The Defendant suffered from an injury to the victim, such as salt ties, tensions, etc., which require approximately two weeks of medical treatment due to these negligence.

2. The Defendant and his defense counsel asserted the injury of the victim of the instant traffic accident.

3. According to the Defendant’s legal statement, F’s statement, diagnosis statement, and black image viewing, traffic accidents, such as the facts charged, have occurred, and the victim was diagnosed of injury, such as “definites and tensions,” which require two-time treatment, as shown in the facts charged.

However, the traffic accident in this case, which can be seen as a result of the video viewing of black booms, did not see the intensity of the contact, and the victim is proceeding without recognizing the accident.

It seems that the defendant set up a vehicle and explained the situation of the accident, and that the victim witness F was also thought to the extent that the road floor is not good in the court, and the victim witness F was also not aware of the accident.

In relation to the injury, the witness was under the prescription of drugs and pain treatment, and received the physical therapy each time of the pain treatment, but the witness was under the influence of the therapy.