around 17:00 on October 22, 2017, the Defendant shared national highways No. 20 on 394, Cheongdo-ro, Cheongbuk-do-do-ro, and continued to proceed from the Twit-do-ro to Hahnhn.

At this point, the road was one lane adjacent to the village, and both houses and water sources were located on both sides of the road, and there was a lot of possibility that pedestrians crossing the road due to delivery to the right side of the road, so a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to thoroughly operate the steering and steering system and prevent accidents from occurring due to proper operation of the steering and steering system.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected the front si, and did not discover the victim D(7) who was crossing from the right side of the process to the left side due to occupational negligence that failed to properly operate the brake system, and did not receive the victim from the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle, and the victim proceeded about about 39.8m with the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle and proceeded with approximately 39.8m of the victim as aground on the front part of the Bows, and got the victim over the floor.

As a result, the Defendant suffered serious injury, such as recognition and functional disability and pedestrian disability, due to the injury of the victim's external illness, where the number of days of treatment can not be known due to such occupational negligence.

2. Determination is an offense falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

According to the records, it can be acknowledged that the parent of parental authority, who is the legal representative of the victim, has withdrawn his/her wish to punish the defendant on September 11, 2018, after the prosecution of this case was instituted.

Therefore, this part of the prosecution is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.