The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is around 13:00 on March 21, 2012, the Defendant: (a) at the crosswalk near the building C in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu; (b) on the one hand, the Defendant was negligent in neglecting his/her duty to exercise due care; and (c) on the other hand, the Defendant got the victim from the negligence of blocking his/her own arms in order to prevent the victim from sustaining his/her own arms; and (d) on the other hand, he/she suffered a erode between the erode, which requires treatment for about 126 days.

2. According to the witness E’s legal statement, at the time of the instant case, the Defendant appears to have acted in favor of the crosswalk.

However, in order to recognize D as playing due to the defendant's negligent behavior, it is insufficient to say that the defendant committed the above behavior, and the defendant committed a sudden act in front of D's moving on the crosswalk.

Along with D, it is necessary to prove the fact that D has reached the level of playing D by engaging in the conduct of cutting down both arms in front of A.D.

The prosecutor's investigation report containing E's full statement about whether the defendant's act was done in front of D's order to build a crosswalk cannot be used as evidence since it did not sign or seal the original person's signature or seal, and the authenticity was not recognized by the original person's statement. The D's investigation agency and its statements in this court, which seem to correspond to the above facts charged, are not consistent with the statement concerning the specific behavior of the defendant, the place where the defendant took place, etc., and therefore, it is difficult to believe them as they are. The remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to recognize them.

D has old age, and the defendant and D have a distance of 1m with the defendant who punished the arms, and D has exceeded the direction of the edge of India.