The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal

A. The facts charged of the instant case are cases in which the Defendant cannot prosecute against the victim’s explicit intent.

In this regard, on May 29, 2017, prior to the pronouncement of the lower judgment, a written agreement stating that the injured party does not want the punishment of the defendant was submitted to the lower court, and thus, the lower court should have sentenced the defendant to the dismissal judgment pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Nevertheless, the court below sentenced the defendant to imprisonment without prison labor for eight months and a two-year suspension of execution. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The prosecutor’s foregoing is the same.

2. The gist of the facts charged is that the Defendant is a person engaging in driving a Clearning car.

On July 4, 2016, the Defendant driven the said car on July 4, 2017:52, and led to the direction towards the sponsing office of the sponsed village, located in the sponse of the sponse of the sponse at the sponse of the Jinju.

At that time, there was a hond, bend, bend and bend, and the driver of a motor vehicle has a duty of care to reduce speed and drive safely by checking well the right and the right of the motor vehicle.

Nevertheless, the defendant neglected this and got the bus stops in the right side of the running direction due to the negligence of the defendant's negligence to go beyond the floor by shocking the victim D (V, 7 years old) waiting buses within the bus stops.

Ultimately, the Defendant caused the victim to suffer serious injury due to the above occupational negligence, such as the pressure frame No. 1, the right-side frame, the left-hand solitary damage, and the damage to the left-hand beer.

3. Determination

A. In light of relevant legal principles, the proviso of Article 4(1)2 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents (hereinafter “Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents”), “the victim’s life risks due to bodily injury.”