On October 5, 2015, around 01:15, the Defendant driving the said taxi with the first lane from the fourth-lane north-ro, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Seoul to the direction of separation from the Guri direction.

Since the Defendant changed the lane into the second lane at the time, in such a case, the Defendant had a duty of care to change the lane by operating direction direction, etc. to those engaged in driving a motor vehicle and giving notice of change of course, and considering the traffic situation at the right and the right and the right and the right and right at the time.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and changed the course from the third lane to the second lane, and caused the victim E (the victim South, the 68-year-old taxi) to operate the steering gear in a balanced manner to avoid drilling, and caused the victim to run the steering gear in order to avoid drilling by negligence.

Defendant at the same time, due to the above occupational negligence, inflicted injury on the victim G (the remaining and 48 years old), who is the passenger of the said rocketing taxi, on the thalthy of the thalth of the thalth of the thalth of the thalth of the thalth of the thalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth

2. The defendant's assertion and his defense counsel did not have a criminal intent as to each of the facts charged in this case since the defendant did not know the occurrence of an accident at the time.

In addition, with respect to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, there was no need to take relief measures because the injury suffered by the victims is insignificant.

The argument is asserted.

3. Therefore, first of all, the defendant's facts charged at the time of the trial.