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

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for 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 of CM3 motor vehicles.

On September 10, 2014, the Defendant driving the said car on the duty of around 19:40, and driving the road in front of the city-U.S. Park in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, to the Marin post office on the side of the Pungam street, the Defendant suffered the body of the victim D (70 years of age) who is crossing the right side from the left side of the horse-based course to the right side of the road without any signal lights, by taking the body of the victim D (70 years of age) who is crossing the right side from the right side of the horse-based course, and caused the victim to suffer about 14 weeks from the shock.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement on the occurrence of a D traffic accident;

1. The actual survey report and on-site photographs;

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

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, 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 in the Selection of Punishment, and Article 268 of the Criminal

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

1. In light of the fact that the reason for sentencing Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on Probation, etc. causes a traffic accident by gross negligence that the defendant is in violation of the duty to protect pedestrians in the crosswalk, the victim suffered a considerable serious injury that requires medical treatment for about 14 weeks due to the above traffic accident, and the defendant committed the crime of this case without due care even though he had a record of being punished two times due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act in the past.

However, the defendant's mistake is divided in depth and reflects the defendant's vehicle, and the defendant's vehicle was covered by a comprehensive insurance, in particular, on October 15, 2014, the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant, and there is no criminal record exceeding the fine of the defendant.