However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant is engaged in driving of CM3 passenger vehicles.

On August 20, 2017, the Defendant driven the above car on August 23:45, 2017, and continued to drive the road on the five-lanes of the long-distance 5-lanes in the direction from the boundary line to the boundary line from the boundary line of the Plun-ro, Glun-ro, Glun-ro, Glun-ro, Glun-ro, Glun-ro, Gl-ro

Since there is an intersection where a signal, etc. is installed, there was a duty of care to safely drive the driver in accordance with the signals by reducing speed and checking the right and the right of the driver.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and even though the front signal was a red signal, the part of the victim D(64) driving in front of the instant car was driven by the victim D(64) who was driven at the shooting distance of the free park in accordance with the left-hand turn turn at the right-hand turn on the side of the front line.

As a result, the Defendant suffered, by the above occupational negligence, the victim FF (33 tax) who was on board the cab head for about 8 weeks of medical treatment of the victim D, with approximately 3 weeks of dynasium in need of medical treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A statement prepared by the F;

1. Investigation report (victim D's statement);

1. Traffic accident reports, actual investigation reports, and investigation reports;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. Application of the statutes on photographs;

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition;

1. Selection of a credit cooperative without prison labor for punishment;

1. The sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (The following sentencing is more favorable) is due to the fact that there is gross negligence in violation of the signal, the size of the accident is reasonable, and in particular, the injury of the victim D is very heavy - The favorable circumstances are contrary to the mistake of the defendant, the primary offender is the automobile comprehensive insurance.