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

On 14:10 on 17:10 on 14:10 on 202, the Defendant tried to drive a B-learning car and drive the three-lane road in front of C-Housing at the time of Jinju, along three-lanes, and to enter the said apartment.

Since signals and crosswalks are installed on the front side and the passage of people has been high, there was a duty of care to safely drive the crosswalk by complying with signals and examining whether there is a pedestrian walking on the crosswalk.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected to do so, and the Defendant was the victim D (10 years old) who dried the crosswalk from the left side of the moving direction to the right side of the road due to the negligence that attempted to make a right-hand turn, even though the pedestrian signal was occupied on the crosswalk.

The Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as a ductal alley, which requires treatment for about six months, due to such occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to traffic accident reports, photographs, and diagnostic certificates;

1. Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) and Article 3 (1) 1 and 6 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, and the selection of fines;

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

1. In violation of the signal at the intersection where the reason for sentencing the sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Provisional Payment Order”), a victim who walks according to the new code was able to get the victim.

However, there is no criminal punishment that recognizes the crime and criminal punishment.

The parents of a victim shall not want punishment by mutual consent with the victim.

In addition, the environment of the defendant is considered.