except that 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 the duty of driving a rocketing taxi.

On December 19, 2013, the Defendant driven the above taxi on December 17:55, 2013, and led to the passage of the Marone Star, which is located in Busan-gu Busan-do, bypassing the road from the side of the children's substitute park to the opposite market.

At all times, the traffic signals for the right-hand vehicle are installed and the crosswalks are located on the front side, so there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving service is a person to reduce speed and to see well the right-hand side and right-hand side and to drive safely in accordance with the new code.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to report the green signal on the crosswalk at the end of the Defendant’s proceeding to the left-hand side of the crosswalk while disregarding and proceeding with the stop signal, and the victim D (the age of 41) who had exceeded the front part of the said taxi.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury, such as cutting the upper half of the left-hand body in need of approximately eight weeks of treatment due to such occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D;

1. Report on a traffic accident, report on the occurrence of a traffic accident, and photographs related to a traffic accident (vehicle photographs, black boxes, on-site photographs);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of diagnosis;

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, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, the selection of imprisonment without prison labor;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition on the grounds of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the degree of damage, but the vehicle of this case is insured by the mutual aid association, the defendant is against the obligation of the mutual aid association, and it seems that the defendant has been engaged in social service activities and has been faithfully living, elderly people, and there are no sufficient criminal records to consider) or higher.