A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of B Poter cargo vehicles.

On June 30, 2017, the Defendant driven the above cargo vehicle around 12:49, and driven the front road of the petition-gu, Cheongju-si, along the direction from the direction near to the intersection, along one lane.

At that time, the center line of yellow solid lines was one-lane, and there was an error in the process prior to it, so in such a case, a person engaged in driving a motor vehicle has a duty of care to observe the traffic laws and regulations and accurately manipulate the steering and brakes to prevent accidents by accurately manipulating the steering direction and brakes before and after the operation of the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and caused the victim to go beyond the floor by taking advantage of the part adjacent to the right side of the above cargo vehicle driven by the Defendant due to the negligence of the victim D (58 tax) who had been going beyond the center line and going beyond the center line, and caused the victim to go beyond the floor.

As a result, the Defendant, by the above occupational negligence, escaped without stopping the victim, without taking measures such as aiding the damaged person, even though he was suffering from an injury such as a wound with no open wound within six weeks of treatment.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Written statements of D;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. Ct video data;

1. A medical certificate;

1. On-site photographs of the accident [the defendant and defense counsel did not recognize the fact of the accident in this case due to the symptoms of low blood transfusion at the time of the accident in this case

However, in light of the fact that the defendant was proceeding beyond the center line to overtake the driver's right of the victim prior to the driving of the vehicle prior to the driving of the vehicle prior to the accident, at the time of the accident of this case, the defendant had an obstacle to the recognition function due to the increase of the her blood relative.

see.