The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant reported 112 as above India when he gets a taxi in which the victim passed, and did not close the door of the taxi that the victim had left.

B. The victim was opening the chief door of the taxi that had been passed at the time of the instant case and did not have a front door.

2. Determination

A. On October 5, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 18:20 on the roads of the C church located in Namdong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, the Defendant: (b) caused the victim D (74 years, south) who is a taxi passenger; and (c) caused the Si expenses to be incurred.

The victim tried to open and take a back a back door of the taxi in order to report after getting off the taxi from the defendant's taxi.

In such a case, the Defendant had a duty of care to prevent the occurrence of danger, such as checking the fact that the victim safely gets off, since the Defendant was in the process of trying to board another taxi with the victim's complaint while under the influence of alcohol, and thus close the door, etc., the victim may face with the risk.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and caused injury to the victim's left side of the taxi due to the negligence of closeing the door that the victim tried to report even when he was in the process of taking the victim in another taxi, and caused the victim to have the victim teared about about 30 meters of the left side of the taxi, and suffered injury such as the snow grass and open wound around the treatment days.

B. The lower court determined that the victim’s statement was consistent with the investigative agency from the date to the court of the lower court’s trial, and there was a reason to prevent the victim from leaving the scene on the ground that the Defendant reported the victim’s oral dispute with the victim at the time, and that there was a reason to prevent the victim from leaving the scene. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant said the victim’s statement as a match with the victim.