However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of freight Class D Ⅱ.

On November 19, 2014, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicle around 23:45, and proceeded along three lanes in the direction of the workers’ welfare center located in the Young-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si with the flow of the 4rd line, which is located in the direction of the Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, the Defendant turned down directly through the intersection.

Since there is a signal apparatus installed, the driver has a duty of care to safely operate by entering the intersection according to the signals.

Nevertheless, despite the left turn signal, the Defendant got the left side of the bicycle driven by the victim E (the 16-year old) who was standing on the crosswalk according to green light by negligence and negligence, beyond the front door of the above cargo vehicle.

The Defendant inflicted an injury on a victim by occupational negligence, such as blood transfusion, which requires surveillance for about six months, on the part of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Scenes of on-site photographs and CCTV video images taken;

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

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the Social Service Order [Scope of Recommendation] is the basic area (including April to October) of the first category of traffic accident (special mitigation) (special mitigation) (including efforts to recover damage), in a case where there is considerable fault in the occurrence of traffic accident or the expansion of damage, in which the victim is punished (type 1), in which serious injury occurs (type 1), in which the illegality in the proviso of Article 3(2) of the Special Education Act is serious (type 1), in which the case where the illegality in the proviso of Article 3(2) of the Special Education Act is serious (type 1), together with the circumstances presented as the above special mitigation (type 1), the defendant is against himself, the fact that the defendant is subscribed to a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance,