From April 5, 2017 to April 21, 2017, the Defendant, from around 04:00 to around 04:00 on the next day, was going to proceed to the direction of a private village from the side of the sexual care center.

At the time, the low-speed road was sleeped, and the front door of the road was passed, and there were vehicles parked at the edge of the road, so that those engaged in driving service could reduce the speed and thoroughly see the front door, while they had a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by driving the parked vehicles with due care and safety by accurately manipulating the steering and brakes, etc.

However, the Defendant, by neglecting this, led to the shock of the vehicle owned by the victim E (30 years old) who was parked at the same place due to his negligence, he shocked the back of the vehicle by the front part of the vehicle driven by the Defendant, and caused the shock of the H Hastna vehicle owned by the victim G (W, 34 years old) who was parked in front of the vehicle damaged by the shock.

The Defendant, by negligence in the above occupational negligence, destroyed the damaged vehicles so that they can repair costs on the road without taking any measures, and escaped without leaving the vehicle alone on the road.

2. Determination

A. The purport of Article 54(1) of the Road Traffic Act is to prevent and eliminate traffic risks and obstacles on the road, thereby ensuring safe and smooth traffic, not to recover the damage of the victim (Supreme Court Decision 2009Do787 Decided May 14, 2009). B. The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court.

- The Defendant driven a vehicle between April 5, 2017 and April 6, 2017, from around 21:00 to around 02:00 on April 6, 2017, and parked on the road as indicated in the facts charged, shocked the rear part of the vehicle. The Defendant was parked in the front while driving the vehicle.