Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of Cystren vehicles.

On May 23, 2015, the Defendant driven the above vehicle on May 10, 2015, and led to the course of the mountain direction from the direction of the mountain direction to the mountain direction.

In this case, a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle has a duty of care to safely drive the motor vehicle in accordance with the signals and the front side and the left side of the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and received the front wheel part of the victim D (the 54-year-old driver’s license) drive the victim D(the 54-year-old driver’s license), who was left to the left in the direction of the sexual intercourse, with the front wheel part of the said rocketing car.

As a result, the Defendant suffered from the above occupational negligence on the part of the victim F (the age of 81) the victim F (the passenger), who is the passenger of the said rocketing vehicle, about two weeks of treatment, the victim G (the age of 81) suffered from the injury, such as satisfying the left pelfa, etc. requiring approximately eight weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. Efabbbbbling images of damaged vehicles;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the report on the occurrence of traffic accidents and the actual survey report;

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

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of alternative imprisonment without prison labor;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act does not be shorter than that of the defendant for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act. However, the fact that the defendant later repents and reflects the erroneousness, that all victims agree with, that the vehicle was covered by the comprehensive motor vehicle insurance, that the defendant has no criminal record of suspended execution or more, and that the defendant has the motive, background, means and method of the instant crime.