The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person engaging in driving service of B automobiles.

On April 18, 2013, the Defendant driven the above car on April 18, 2013, and continued to drive the above car along six-lanes from the Hannam-gu, Gangnam-gu, Seoul to the Hannam-do road of 1130-lanes.

In such cases, a person engaged in driving of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to prevent accidents in advance by securing the necessary distance to avoid a collision with the previous one when the motor vehicle is suddenly stopped.

Nevertheless, the Defendant did not find out the stopping of the D taxi that was driven by C while driving in the front while neglecting this, and received the part of the D taxi in front of the said car as it was.

Ultimately, the Defendant, as a result, caused the above occupational negligence, caused the victim E, who was a passenger boarding the said taxi, to suffer brain-proofs requiring medical treatment for about six weeks, the escape from the sculatory signboards, and the escape from the sculatory signboards.

2. In light of the judgment, the above facts charged are crimes falling under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents and Article 268 of the Criminal Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents. According to the agreement bound in the records, the victim may be acknowledged on January 9, 2014, which is the date the prosecution of this case was instituted, that the victim expressed his/her intent not to

Therefore, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.