A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in driving of K5 si.

On December 11, 2015, the Defendant came to turn to the left at the front of the hospital located in Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Seo-gu.

At the time, since the surrounding areas were not good, the defendant engaged in driving service has a duty of care to reduce the speed and to see well the right and the right of the front side.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and did not discover the victim E (44 ) and received the victim’s right edge part with the front right side of the taxi left side of the taxi of the Defendant.

Ultimately, even though the Defendant suffered injury by the victim, such as the body strings, heavy strings, and double strings, which require approximately 14 weeks of medical treatment due to the above occupational negligence, the Defendant immediately stopped and escaped without taking necessary measures, such as aiding the victimized person.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. A written statement;

1. A survey report on actual conditions;

1. A medical certificate;

1. Application of statutes on field photographs;

1. Relevant Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes and Article 268 of the Criminal Act concerning the crime and the selection of punishment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (a relatively minor degree of damage) does not have the same criminal history, and the accused is admitted to the mutual aid association. The victim was involved in the act of crossinging the road without permission at the location of the road where the crosswalk was not installed, and the occurrence of the instant traffic accident or the expansion of damage was caused. After the conclusion of the pleadings, the victim deposited part of the damage amount for the victim, and the Defendant deposited the damage amount for the victim. However, the Defendant did not have any reasonable reason to consider the Defendant, such as the following misunderstanding of his mistake.