Since there is no signal signal, a person engaged in driving duty has a duty of care to check whether there is a vehicle crossing by thoroughly and temporarily stopping the speed of the front line and reducing or temporarily stopping.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went through the intersection on the right side from the left side of the proceeding direction due to the negligence of entering the intersection by the Defendant’s negligence, and thereby, received the victim’s DNA driving car’s remainder part of the Ethraca, which passed the intersection on the right side, as the first front part of the Defendant’s driving car.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered from the injury of the Victim F (L, 42 years of age) who was on a car in the above test due to the above occupational negligence by causing approximately six weeks of treatment to the victim F (L, 42 years of age).

2. The instant facts charged cannot be punished against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. According to the records, it is recognized that the agreement was submitted on April 22, 2014, which was after the institution of the instant indictment, that the Defendant would not be punished. Thus, the instant indictment is dismissed pursuant to Article 327 subparag. 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.