Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a rocketing taxi driver.

On January 6, 2013, the Defendant driven the above taxi on January 23:53, 2013, and led to the roads of four lanes in front of the Chungcheong apartment in the two-lane-dong, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-si, Seoan-si, to drive at an insular speed, depending on three lanes in the direction of the apartment of the Yongsan-gu.

Since there is a crosswalk where a signal, etc. is installed, there was a duty of care to check whether a person engaged in driving service has a road by reducing speed and checking the right and the right and the right of the road well, and to safely drive the road in accordance with the new subparagraph.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and proceeded as it is while disregarding the fact that the vehicle progress signal is changed to the stop signal, and the victim C (the age of 42) and the victim D (the age of 43) who cross the crosswalk from the left side to the right side were shocked with the front part of the taxi driving by the Defendant.

After all, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim C, such as a pelle satis, etc., which requires approximately 4 weeks of treatment from the victim C due to such occupational negligence, and a pelle satum, etc., which require approximately 8 weeks of treatment from the victim D.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement C and D;

1. Each written diagnosis;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as site and photographs of skins;

1. Article 3 (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 an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the defendant's reason for sentencing of the provisional payment order is limited to the negligence of the accident of this case where the victims crossing the crosswalk while driving in violation of the signal, and the defendant's criminal liability is relatively heavy in that the victims' injury is relatively heavy.

However, the victims agree that the defendant's mistake is recognized, and the victims agree.