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

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving a car in B.

On January 30, 2018, at around 14:10, the Defendant, at around 14:10, proceeded to turn to the left at an unfasible speed with the distance of D'D', which has been coming from the area of the public restaurant.

Since a crosswalk without signal lights is installed, there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a way to reduce speed and to see well the right and the right of the motor vehicle and to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and got the injured party to go beyond the road by taking the front side of the victim E (the age of 72) from the right side of the road to the left side of the road.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim, such as double gambling, which requires approximately three weeks of medical treatment, due to such occupational negligence.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A written statement of the occurrence of E traffic accidents;

1. A traffic accident report;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing accident scene photographs;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act for the protection and observation observation is that the nature of the crime is not weak in light of the instant negligence and the substance of the accident, and the Defendant committed the instant crime by driving with the view to the visual disability of Grade 5 in the right eye and the driving with the view to the right bridge, even though there was an obstacle to the right bridge, and the Defendant committed a traffic accident similar to the instant case even before the lapse of two months, the Defendant’s driving vehicle is subscribed to liability insurance, and there was no agreement with the victim. Meanwhile, the Defendant led to the instant crime.