If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a CM5 car.

On October 22, 2013, the Defendant driven the above vehicle around 12:10 on October 22, 2013, and tried to drive the three-lane road in the direction of the Seongbuk-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Mangsan-ro, 662-lane, Sungsan-si, along one-lane from the direction of the Busan Metropolitan City Residents' Center to the direction of the conversation.

Since there is a crosswalk where a signal, etc. is installed, it was confirmed whether a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to safely drive according to the new subparagraph after checking whether there is a person who will cut the way by reducing the speed and by properly examining the right and the right of the road.

Nevertheless, due to the negligence of disregarding and proceeding the vehicle driving signal even though it was neglected, the victim D(51) who crosses the crosswalk from the left side to the right side in accordance with the pedestrian signal was assigned to the front side of the car of the defendant.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury, such as scarcity scarcity, from the victim’s negligence on duty, for about two weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Written statements of D;

1. The actual condition survey report, a traffic accident occurrence report, and on-site photographs;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 3 (1) and proviso to Article 3 (2) 1 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents According to the Selection of Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion on the claim of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, argued that there is no causal relationship between the defendant's negligence and the traffic accident of this case since the victim passed a crosswalk with his bicycle ing, so the defendant's negligence and the traffic accident of this case are not causal relationship. Thus, the bicycle driver can pass along the crosswalk pursuant to Articles 13-2 (6) and 27 of the Road Traffic Act, and the victim's bicycle driver can get off the crosswalk. Although the victim s