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 who is engaged in driving a sealed motor vehicle B (hereinafter “instant motor vehicle”).

On December 29, 2012, the Defendant driven the instant vehicle as his duties without a driver’s license on December 18:31, 2012, and operated the front road of 40-6, which is set forth above, at the time of three-way decline, from the boundary of a three-dimensional public playground to the side of a teaching bridge.

At this point, the two straight lines are the straight line road of the two lanes, and the victim C's Dmea car was parked on the right side of the proceeding lane. On the opposite lane, the Fpoter freight driven by the victim E (the age of 41) has a duty of care to ensure that the accident does not occur due to the fact that the Fpoter freight driven by the victim E (the age of 41) has been broken off, so there was a duty of care to ensure that the accident does not occur.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and found the test square vehicle parked on the right side of the running lane by his negligence, and immediately operated hand on the left side of the vehicle, but did not avoid any collision, and the lower left side part of the test square is shocked with the front driver's right side of the vehicle in question and the rear driver's side side of the vehicle in question, and the front and front part of the rear driver's side of the vehicle in front of the rear driver's side of the vehicle in question, which was closed on the opposite lane beyond the center line, were shocked by the front driver's side and the left-hand light part of the vehicle in question.

Ultimately, the Defendant, by such occupational negligence, sustained injury to the victim E and the victim G (34 years old) who was accompanied by each two weeks of the foregoing injury, such as salt, tension, etc. in need of the treatment for each two weeks. The Defendant immediately stopped the back of the passenger car to the repair cost of KRW 1,814,00, and escaped without taking measures such as providing relief to the victim, even though the latter part of the passenger car was damaged to the repair cost of KRW 3,63,00, the repair cost of the passenger car.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Each actual survey report, each on-site photograph, respectively.