However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

At around 23:30 on July 13, 2013, the Defendant driven the Daju B K5 si and proceeded two lanes in front of the intersection near the mountain zone in the U.S. in the U.S., Gwangju Northern-dong from the U.S. Library to the E.S., while neglecting the duty of care to prevent the accident due to driving under the new subparagraph, the Defendant caused the victim C (40 years of age) driver's Habbba, who proceeded to the left side from the Defendant's moving toward the intersection in violation of the signals to prevent the accident, resulting in the Defendant's injury, such as a fry cage, which requires approximately six weeks of treatment to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of the actual survey report and photographs of traffic accidents-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendant’s reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act regarding orders to provide community service and attend lectures is proceeding without disregarding the signal of suspension at the intersection.

In light of the fact that the defendant's negligence may be considerably serious (a situation where the Gu or the defendant could have sufficiently discovered the victim's ozone part in the front section) of the accident of this case, the victim suffered bodily injury, such as a catus catus which requires multiple treatment for about six weeks, and the degree of damage of the victim is considerably significant, and the victim could have suffered significant damage, and even if the defendant could not be aware of the importance of his own negligence, it cannot be said that the nature and the criminality of the crime of this case are somewhat weak, but the damage side of the accident of this case.