The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person who drives a passenger car B.

On June 7, 2017, the Defendant driven a ready-light car around 06:43, and proceeded to turn to the left in the direction of a green straight park in the middle of the non-protection left-hand left-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-on-hand-hand-hand-on-hand-hand-hand-hand-hand-on-hand-hand

There is a section in which the left-hand turn at the time of green signal is allowed, but in this case all drivers of vehicles shall not interfere with the course of the vehicle coming from the opposite direction, and in the opposite direction, there was a duty of care to temporarily stop and yield when the vehicle is driving in the opposite direction and prevent the collision.

Nevertheless, the Defendant caused a traffic accident that conflicts between the front part of the victim C(65) driving Dom 7 car in the direction of green signals in the early white village with the front part of his vehicle operation in the direction of the early white village. In addition, the Defendant suffered the injury of the victim C, who is the driver of the victimized vehicle, such as “satise and tension of the satise of the satise,” which requires approximately three weeks of treatment, and the injury of the victim E (V, 63 years of age), which requires approximately two weeks of treatment for the same passenger E (V, 63 years of age).

2. The instant 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, which cannot be prosecuted against the express intent of the victims under the main sentence of Article 3(2) of the same Act.

In this case, it is clear that the victims explicitly expressed their intention not to be punished against the defendant on August 2, 2017, which was after the prosecution of this case was instituted. Thus, the prosecution of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.