Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in the driving of W125 B W1.

On November 19, 2019, the Defendant operated the front road C in the direction of the new interest market at about 59 km from the direction of the new interest market to the direction of the D elementary school.

There are roads where children's protection zones and signs are installed, and the speed of restriction is 30 km a speed, so a person engaged in driving motor vehicles shall not drive rapidly more than the highest speed, and he/she has a duty of care to prevent accidents.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and proceeded at a speed exceeding 29 km per hour while driving the bicycle on the right side of the victim E (n.e., 62 years old) as the front part of the two-wheeled vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as the 11 week chills, which require approximately 11 weeks of medical treatment, due to the above occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Reporting a traffic accident investigation report to the police interrogation protocol to the defendant's legal statement E, a diagnosis of the traffic accident analysis report, and the application of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes to the scene photographs of the accident;

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

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Provisional Payment Order is that the defendant's act of driving in excess of the restricted speed in the child protection zone causes an accident is not that of the crime.

The degree of injury suffered by the victim is also serious.

However, considering favorable circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant's mistake and misjudgments the defendant's mistake, the fact that the victim's negligence seems to have contributed significantly to the occurrence of the accident of this case and the expansion of damage, such as the progress beyond the central separation zone where the victim was damaged, the age, sex, environment, and crime of the defendant.