On October 5, 2015, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at around 13:25 on October 13, 2015, and opened the road in front of the agency in Kimcheon-si D from the right intersection to the office of Kimcheon-si, and left the opposite lane after stopping. In such a case, when it is apprehended that a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle may impede the normal traffic of other motor vehicles, the Defendant has a duty of care to yield the course for the vehicle.

However, the Defendant neglected to do so and did not avoid GVF125 Oba, which was driven by the Victim F (55 years) who is going to the direct intersection from the right side of Mincheon Kim-si, Mincheon-si, and received the above Obaba in the front right side of the said car.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the above victim due to the above occupational negligence, i.e., blood transfusion, verbal disorder, and pactacy, focusing on the fact that there is no open address in two parts, and thereby, the Defendant suffered injury, such as the victim’s frighten or incurable disease. This led to the frighten or incurable disease.

2. The instant case 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 pursuant to the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents.

According to the records, according to the records of the victim's denial of the victim's appearance on behalf of the victim, the victim's normal expression of opinion is difficult, the victim's mother also lacks aged judgment ability, and other punishments of the victim are abroad or omitted, and it is recognized that the above H delegates delegated the treatment of this case.

It is recognized that the defendant expressed his intention not to be punished after the prosecution of this case was instituted.

Therefore, it is true.