Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of a passenger car in the D SP area.

On September 25, 2013, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at around 23:00, and 38 countries in front of the F in E at the time of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the ruling of the lower court,

Since a number of signals are installed, all drivers of vehicles have a duty of care to drive safely according to their signals.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and immediately proceeded with the Defendant’s vehicle in contravention of the signal, at the same time, was shocked by the front part of the Defendant’s driving vehicle with the front part of the Defendant’s driving vehicle, which was driven by the victim G(31 years old) who was operating in the U.S. according to the normal new code, from the F room, the opposite part of the Defendant’s vehicle, to the front part of the Defendant’s driving vehicle.

The Defendant, by its occupational negligence, sustained injury to the victim I (the 40-year-old), who is the passenger of the Defendant driving vehicle, due to approximately seven weeks of injury, such as knee-free knee open room, and injury to the victim G (the 31-year-old-old-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-age-of-life treatment that requires approximately two weeks of treatment, and injury to the victim J (the 31-year-old-age-age-age-age-of-life

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of witness G, J and K;

1. The actual condition survey report;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Comprehensive traffic accident analysis report and vehicle inspection program;

1. Each written diagnosis (as to the photographic photo taken of L's statement of the police officer and the part of the on-site photo, it is difficult to deem that the prosecutor has proved that he/she has made full efforts to attend the court even when he/she was able to make full efforts for the witness’s appearance, rendering a decision to exclude evidence in accordance with Article 139(4) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do1435,

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. Trade name;