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

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of B-si.

On June 28, 2016, the Defendant driven the above taxi on June 18, 2016, and turned to the left the right at the front of the front apartment, which is located in the air-conditioning of the Si/Gu, and then came to the left from the front of the fire-fighting police box.

At the same time, the crosswalk was installed on the front side, and the victim C (the 63-year-old age) was laid down from the right side of the above crosswalk to the left side, so there was a duty of care to check whether there was a person who gets on the road driving service, and to check whether there was a person who gets on the road by reducing the speed and checking well the right and the right of the road.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and got kneeee, etc. in front of the left side of the victim due to his negligence.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim to suffer injury, such as cutting the frame of the light frame in need of approximately 12 weeks of medical treatment due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. C’s statement;

1. The actual survey report and the accident site photograph;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a medical certificate;

1. Article 3 (1), the proviso to Article 3 (2) and Article 3 (6) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents concerning Facts constituting an offense, and Article 268 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act on orders to provide community service and attend lectures;

1. Where the illegality in the basic area (including serious efforts to recover damage) of the type 1 (the injury caused by traffic accidents) (the fourth to the year) of general traffic accidents is serious in the sentencing guidelines (the scope of recommendations) / Cases where the illegality in the proviso (excluding subparagraph 8) of Article 3 (2) of the Specialized School Act is serious;

2. The defendant who has pronounced a sentence shall drive an automobile;

A pedestrian crossing is shocked to the victim, and the degree of injury suffered by the victim is relatively heavy.

However, the vehicle of the defendant is covered by the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, and the defendant has agreed with the victim, and the defendant.