When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of a taxi for rocketing other business purposes.

On May 15, 2019, at around 14:30, the Defendant entered the intersection of the private street in front of the Jindong-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, along the one-lanes from the direction of the opposite intersection, along the direction of the intersection.

At the time, the Defendant’s running direction was installed with the red-fluoring signal apparatus and crosswalk at the front of the crosswalk, so in such cases, the person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle was negligent in driving the victim D(74 years old) driving through the intersection in accordance with the yellow-fluoring signal apparatus at the right side of the Defendant’s running direction, without temporarily suspending in spite of the fact that the duty of care to proceed with another traffic was due to the temporary stop immediately before the crosswalk, and due to the negligence that the driver of a motor vehicle was obliged to proceed with the intersection, without temporarily suspending, while driving the intersection, and caused the victim to suffer injury, such as the fluor and the fluoring of the non-fluoral dival, etc.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Written statements of D;

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes as a result of reproduction and viewing of a survey report, accident site photograph, diagnosis report, and black and video files stored in CDs;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground of sentencing under Article 334(1) of the provisional payment order is that the victim’s injury caused by the instant crime is not less and less liable for the crime, and that the defendant reflects the instant crime, as well as that the taxi of the defendant was insured by the mutual aid association, and that the defendant wants the victim to take the highest preference without the defendant’s punishment by the agreement by paying the victim KRW 30 million.