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

The Defendant is a person engaging in driving a BMW car.

At around 14:00 on December 21, 2013, the Defendant driven the above car, and led to the left-hand turn to the fluoral of the name ginseng, which is located in the Silbuk-gun, Seolbuk-gun, Gyeongbuk-do.

Since there is a place where the center line of yellow-ray is installed, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to safely drive by complying with the tea line.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and neglected to commit the central line, and received DK3 car full-scale parts of the victim C (Nam, 31 years old) driving in the opposite direction at the time when he was frighten.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury, such as a scarcity, from the victim’s occupational negligence, which requires approximately eight weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. The actual survey report on traffic accidents;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (the diagnosis of a victim);

1. Article 3 (1) and the proviso to Article 3 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Special Cases concerning the Selection of Punishment, Article 268 of the Criminal Act, the selection of imprisonment without prison labor;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act of the community service order and order to attend a lecture [the scope of recommendation] there is no basic field (the person who has been specially punished) of the first type of general traffic accident (the first type of traffic accident) [the decision of sentence] [the defendant] six months without prison labor], the defendant in the suspension of execution one year is a person who has been punished several times due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, the Road Traffic Act, and the violation of the Road Traffic Act, and again causes the accident in this case, and the victim's injury is not minor, but the defendant's liability is not minor, in light of the fact that the victim did not have been injured, the vehicle was covered by the comprehensive automobile insurance, and the defendant's age, character, intelligence and environment, motive, means and result of the