The Defendant has publicly notified the summary of the judgment of innocence of this case.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person engaging in driving of CPoter 2 freight vehicles.

On July 11, 2016, the Defendant driven the above-mentioned vehicle around 17:00, and moved the intersection of the street in front of the Estres, which is located in the Gyeongbuk-gun, the elderly of the Gyeongbuk-gun, to the right side of the Japanese church from the front side of the road to the front side of the church.

Since the location is a private road crossing in a village with no signal, a person engaged in driving service has a duty of care to check whether a vehicle, etc. passes through an intersection by reducing the speed or temporarily stopping, and to drive it.

Nevertheless, the Defendant neglected this and went beyond the road by shocking the front wheel part of the victim F (M, 76 years old) who was getting a bicycle on the right side from the left side of the village hall in the direction of the running side of the Defendant at the time when he got a right side of the village hall to the left side of the Defendant’s vehicle.

Ultimately, the Defendant suffered from the victim F due to the above occupational negligence in a 10-day therapy.

2. The burden of proof for the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial is to be borne by the public prosecutor, and the conviction of guilt is to be based on the evidence with probative value sufficient for a judge to have the truth that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt for guilt against the defendant, it shall be judged in the interest of the defendant even if there is no such evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do5662, Dec. 24, 2002).

In such cases, the driver of a bypassing vehicle shall stop in accordance with the new subparagraph or take care of pedestrians or bicycles (Article 25 (1) of the Road Traffic Act).