1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment without prison labor for eight months;

2. Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive;

3.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who is engaged in the operation of a rocketing taxi for business purposes.

On July 17, 2016, the Defendant driven the above vehicle at a speed of about 30 km from the direction of the Pungwon University Hospital located in the south-gu Seoul Metropolitan City to the direction of the Pungwon University Hospital at a speed of about 0 km each other at a speed of about 30 km each other, depending on three lanes from the direction of the Pungwon University Hospital in the south-gu, Gwangju.

At the time, a crosswalk is installed on the right side of the defendant's proceeding, so in such a case, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to temporarily stop in front of the crosswalk so as not to obstruct the passage of the pedestrian or endanger the pedestrian, and to prevent the accident in advance.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected to do so and neglected to walk from the side of the salt-based sports center to the direction of the wind, along the pedestrian signal, received the victim D(57 years of age) who walked on the crosswalk from the side of the salt-based sports center as the front part of the Defendant’s vehicle.

As a result, the Defendant suffered injury to the victim due to the above occupational negligence, which requires medical treatment for about 12 weeks, i.e., pulverization of culvers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of traffic accident reports, diagnostic certificates, on-site photographs-related Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. The prosecutor was prosecuted on the charge of a violation of the corresponding provision of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, Article 3(1) and proviso of Article 3(2)6 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, and Article 3(2) proviso of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement

However, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by each of the above evidence, it cannot be deemed that the defendant was negligent in violating the above signal.

(1) According to the Enforcement Rule of the Road Traffic Act (attached Table 2), motor vehicles and horses may move straight or bypass in cases of green signal.

② However, the defendant is stated in its reasoning.