Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who operates a C mining searcher.

On January 4, 2016, around 14:50, the Defendant operated the above mining season at the construction site of the new construction site of the Simyeong-gun Co., Ltd., which is located in Simyeong-gun D, and made a smooth operation of the new construction site of the Simyeong-gun.

In the above place, D community residents, including victims F who oppose the establishment of the KF factory, were making a opposing demonstration.

In such cases, a person who operates a mining searcher has a duty of care to assign signal numbers to the radius of the landing searcher work, to check that there is no passage of people, and to adjust the landing searcher after checking that there is no passage of people.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and did not discover the victim's own image in front of the operation C of the defendant's operation operation, and the part before the operation of the c of the c of the c of the c of the c of the c of the c of the c of the c of the c of the

Accordingly, the defendant caused the injury to the left-hand garment and pulverization of the victim, which requires treatment for a period of time not known to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Some statements made to the defendant during the police interrogation protocol (three times);

1. Each police statement made with respect to G and H;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the de facto investigation report and each investigation report (the No. 10, 13, 26 of the evidence list);

1. Article 268 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 268 of the Selection of Punishment Act;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendant was negligent in the occurrence of the instant accident, since the Defendant could not have predicted the above actions of the victim at the time of the occurrence of the instant accident, inasmuch as the alleged victim had been negligent in the occurrence of the instant accident.

and even if the defendant was negligent, the defendant was not guilty.

even if such negligence and the occurrence of the instant accident are related to the causal relationship

shall not be deemed to exist.

2. The judgment adopted and examined by this Court.